No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Airlock vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Airlock
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
9.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (40th)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

Airlock and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Airlock is designed for Web Application Firewall (WAF) and holds a mindshare of 0.8%, up 0.5% compared to last year.
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM), on the other hand, focuses on Application Delivery Controllers (ADC), holds 11.4% mindshare, down 15.7% since last year.
Web Application Firewall (WAF) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Airlock0.8%
Imperva Application Security Platform7.2%
Cloudflare5.0%
Other87.0%
Web Application Firewall (WAF)
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)11.4%
NetScaler11.7%
HAProxy8.3%
Other68.6%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Tiodor Jovovic - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Business Officer at Sky Express
Provides endless features and can be adapted to every single application that exists in the world
WAF is the most beneficial feature for security posture. Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product. The level of detail of the configuration is the most significant aspect. We can adapt it to every single application that exists in the world. The product helps with the compliance processes.
edshyaa - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at Stryker
Load balancing has improved traffic distribution and currently supports high availability upgrades
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) offers effective load balancing methods that help distribute traffic across our servers, whether we have two or several. This load balancing feature stands out as it is the fundamental work we do with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). While I recognize there are many features, such as iRules, which I have not explored yet, we primarily work on VIPs, pool members, and traffic distribution. The load balancing algorithms' flexibility makes them very useful for our team, enabling us to choose different servers and manage load effectively. We use various methods based on user or application requirements, making the algorithms set up by F5 in the backend quite helpful. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) positively impacts our organization primarily through its load balancing capabilities. We avoid traffic overload on individual servers by placing backend servers behind F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) VIP. This load balancing helps us manage traffic effectively. Since the configuration of the I-series, we have had smooth performance, and with the recent migration to the R-series, it is working faster than before, providing positive outcomes for our operations. Since moving to the R-series, I notice improved performance; it is user-friendly and handles traffic efficiently. The upgrading process is different as we create tenants and a main host. R-series has better CPU and memory, leading to higher throughput with minimal downtime, making it a significant improvement over the I-series.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Our customers are more than satisfied with the user experience provided by the product."
"The most valuable feature is the proxy, which is set up as a reverse proxy in front of the server and allows me to do anything with the traffic, such as inspecting it."
"The most valuable features of the solution are in the area of DDoS and WAF."
"The Local Traffic Manager (LTM) provides a simple low balance and SSL decryption, in addition to some TCP parameters, for incoming and outgoing traffic to redirect appropriate traffic patterns to appropriate servers."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is scalable and secure, so we propose this solution to customers with bigger environments, e.g. those in the government."
"Its user interface is very easy to use on a day-to-day basis. It is very user-friendly."
"I think F5's tech support may be better than Citrix's because they mainly focus on the ADC product, but Citrix support covers Hypervisor, XenMobile, FAS, and ADC. And from my experience, sometimes, we face some issues that Citrix cannot handle."
"iRules are very valuable. In addition to that, the way profiles are depicted by the LTM is also very good."
"The support from F5 BIG-IP LTM is good."
 

Cons

"The tool must be simplified."
"The synchronization does works fairly well. However, if I were to make changes, I would make it easier to start the sync process."
"The auto logout feature after three minutes is terrible. I wish they would make that longer, since it is not a feature that we can change."
"F5 has another solution to load balance servers on the cloud, which they got after the purchase of NGINX. It is deployed as Kubernetes or something like that, but the problem now is that they have two solutions for two situations. They should make F5 deployable on the cloud."
"BIG-IP LTM's sandboxing integration could be improved."
"Active-Standby sync has to be made automatic."
"The management interface is unclear, complex, and not concise. I would like a better user interface."
"F5 lateral scalability within the container is still restricted."
"The ASM administration is quite complex."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is cheap."
"Security should be involved in any base license. When you bring on F5, you only have default license. Then, the ASM product license has to be purchased. It would be great if F5 could include the ASM in the base license."
"There are no additional fees to the standard licensing fee; everything is paid once."
"The solution is quite expensive if we compare it with the competition."
"F5 pricing is too high, compared to Citrix."
"F5 BIG-IP can be expensive, although there are trial versions available which are helpful to find out if the solution is right for your company."
"It is quite expensive as a product. Because it is very stable, it is also expensive."
"The cost that they have with AWS are almost prohibitive. I'm being forced to use F5 WAF. I would not simply use it based on cost. I agree that they have some great features, but for me, cost is key in terms of AWS."
"If your IT budget is good, go for it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
10%
Government
10%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business62
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise86
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP?
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) could improve file upload speeds when opening cases and attaching files; sometimes, downloading files like QKView takes time, depending on size. I expect faste...
What is your primary use case for F5 BIG-IP?
My main use case for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is placing our applications on F5 and the backend servers on the pool. We also regularly renew SSL certificates before they expire, usuall...
 

Also Known As

Airlock Suite
F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Raiffeisen, SGKB, Generali, Visana
Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Imperva, Radware, F5 and others in Web Application Firewall (WAF). Updated: November 2026.
921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.