We performed a comparison between A10 Networks Thunder ADC and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is user-friendly and the CLA troubleshooting is easier compared to other solutions."
"The most valuable features in A10 Networks Thunder ADC are the ease of configuration, user-friendliness, and simplicity to sell to customers."
"The solution is stable."
"The DNS application firewall and load balancing are very valuable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is IP Intelligence."
"What we like best about this solution is its stability. It is extremely stable."
"Currently, it's distributing the load perfectly, as per my understanding of our requirements."
"LTM's most valuable features include application security, data collection, and parameter-level rules."
"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP LTM is it helps our delivery team to make policies and rules for application."
"Its user interface is very easy to use on a day-to-day basis. It is very user-friendly."
"BIG-IP LTM's most valuable feature is that it allows you to seamlessly add more servers without impacting your application's configuration."
"I have found F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) to be stable."
"The costs can be quite high."
"A graphical dashboard for analyzing performance is needed."
"There are competitors that have more features."
"A10 Networks Thunder ADC could improve on the Application Delivery Controller. it's not a fully-fledged web application firewall solution. For example, application data and support need to improve."
"The pricing could always be better. It's a bit expensive."
"It would be good to have better traffic and better data. It would be nice to have more granularity to see packets in terms of the header details, the analytics, etc. It would be nice if that was also part of it and to have analytics added to the traffic."
"Technical support is somewhat slow and could be improved."
"It requires a particular skill or training before being able to manage it."
"Its GUI could be a bit better. Other than that, it's already pretty good. We don't use it in a high-performance environment. So, we don't really care so much about too many features."
"The solution could improve the ease of use, the management could be simplified. Other solutions are easier to use."
"The initial setup can take a long time."
"The pricing model has caused some frustration. My clients implemented the solution and later wanted to upgrade the features but the pricing structure was complicated. There are other solutions with better pricing models."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
A10 Networks Thunder ADC is ranked 12th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 4 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 43 reviews. A10 Networks Thunder ADC is rated 8.0, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of A10 Networks Thunder ADC writes "Easy to set up with good features and great reliability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Great support, helpful documentation, and is user-friendly". A10 Networks Thunder ADC is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, NGINX Plus, Fortinet FortiADC, HAProxy and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Citrix NetScaler, NGINX Plus, Fortinet FortiADC and Avi Networks Software Load Balancer. See our A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.