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

Aruba Boost Unified WAN Optimization vs Steelhead 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

Aruba Boost Unified WAN Opt...
Ranking in WAN Optimization
14th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Steelhead
Ranking in WAN Optimization
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
26
Ranking in other categories
WAN Edge (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the WAN Optimization category, the mindshare of Aruba Boost Unified WAN Optimization is 2.1%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Steelhead is 15.5%, up from 13.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
WAN Optimization Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Steelhead15.5%
Aruba Boost Unified WAN Optimization2.1%
Other82.4%
WAN Optimization
 

Featured Reviews

WaqasNaeem - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Easy-to-deploy with valuable features for web optimization
The platform’s features for latency mitigation help optimize user experience. There are multiple techniques one could follow to enhance the application's performance. To optimize cloud connectivity, they provide strategies such as local internet breakout. In the context of cloud services, particularly Infrastructure as a Service (IaaS) and Software as a Service (SaaS) applications, deploying virtual appliances contributes to reducing costs associated with express route links. This approach enhances web optimization. The traffic shaping features play a crucial role in optimizing web operations and enhancing WAN efficiency. It can be integrated with most of the applications. I rate it a nine out of ten.
Chaudhary Muhammad Moez Manzar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior manager at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Reduces operational costs through bandwidth optimization but struggles with high traffic licensing and complex deployments
The logs in Steelhead are fantastic. There is a deep level of logs such as top 10 docker and top 50 docker. I can check from the top 50 docker which type of application is optimizing well and which type of traffic is not optimized. Steelhead provides logs and percentage levels, which is good. I can see any type of log report, report security, different types of report availability, but it is not customizable. Overall, this is a good feature. Steelhead provides real-time optimization with graphs and tables on real-time optimization, informing us packet by packet including port, source IP, destination IP, and destination port number. This reporting and real-time monitoring is fantastic, although I faced a problem in Oracle. Steelhead mainly saves the money that needs to be paid to ISPs. My actual traffic is around 2 GB, but I purchased a link from the ISP for only around 700 to 800 MB. All the prices that need to be paid monthly to the ISP are saved, which is a significant saving for my company after using Riverbed.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The platform’s features for latency mitigation help optimize user experience."
"Steelhead's most valuable feature is its ability to hash and send only the important parts of the information, avoiding the resending of data."
"Steelhead mainly saves the money that needs to be paid to ISPs; my actual traffic is around 2 GB, but I purchased a link from the ISP for only around 700 to 800 MB, and all the prices that need to be paid monthly to the ISP are saved, which is a significant saving for my company after using Riverbed."
"Scalable data referencing is the most valuable feature developed by Riverbed."
"There are several features specific to branches, like keeping data hot and active on Steelhead devices. These features prevent unnecessary data travel across the international LAN."
"This product is far way ahead from its competitors."
"SteelHead works from the application. I use it to optimize traffic from Amazon. It is mainly used for customers who need to increase the traffic to 33K. For other users, it has been more of an operation."
"Customer service is really efficient, Riverbed TAC access is quick and easy, and the service is globally valuable."
"I find the most valuable to be the compression and exchange replication."
 

Cons

"Currently, we encounter challenges in terms of the functioning of compression, deduplication, and other features even after uploading the certificate for encrypted traffic."
"The product should offer more integration capabilities."
"I would like to see improvement in the solution’s configuration and protocol aspects. We have got some configurations that are not set. I would also like to simplify the call detection of some protocols."
"Steelhead is considered an expensive solution in our country. On a scale of one to ten for expense, it would be rated an eight."
"There was a significant challenge when moving from an older version to a newer one due to changed quality of service policies."
"The traffic is passing, but Oracle DB traffic experiences lag and slowness due to Steelhead, while other applications perform fine."
"The scalability is not the best. If you find that you have outgrown the capacity of your appliance you are forced to repurchase the license and the appliance with very little discount even if your appliance is still under contract."
"There are issues with the tech support and scalability."
"The product needs improvement in its integration with SDN."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product has flexible pricing models."
"The solution is expensive and the service contacts are costly too. The cost of the device makes the value proposition borderline acceptable for us. The service contract fees we pay is approximately $30,000 annually."
"Across our 12 data centers, we spend around $150k annually."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which WAN Optimization solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Manufacturing Company
15%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise14
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
We just did an assessment for our 47 datacenters around North America. The top two enterprise-level network monitoring solutions were ExtraHop first, Riverbed SteelCenter second. Their negotiated c...
What is your primary use case for Riverbed Steelhead?
I am currently working with Riverbed for replication between PR to DR for synchronization purposes, and for WAN optimization between replication from one data center to another data center. The mai...
What advice do you have for others considering Riverbed Steelhead?
Application performance may improve with Steelhead, but it varies application to application. Some applications, such as Oracle traffic, are not working well, but other traffic performs fine. The t...
 

Also Known As

Silver Peak Unity Boost, Unity Boost
RIverbed Steelhead
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
ElAraby, SFK Leblanc, Bobst Group, Northwest Pipe Company, Halkbank, Tradebridge, EFG Hermes
Find out what your peers are saying about Riverbed, Hewlett Packard Enterprise, Cato Networks and others in WAN Optimization. Updated: August 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.