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

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 4, 2024

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

iboss
Sponsored
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
Internet Security (3rd), Web Content Filtering (1st), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (6th), ZTNA as a Service (7th), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (7th)
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Man...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
19th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
Network Access Control (NAC) (11th), SSL VPN (7th), Remote Access (18th), Access Management (15th)
Sangfor Internet Access Gat...
Ranking in Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
33rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Secure Web Gateways (SWG) category, the mindshare of iboss is 3.5%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is 1.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) is 0.8%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
iboss3.5%
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)1.5%
Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)0.8%
Other94.2%
Secure Web Gateways (SWG)
 

Featured Reviews

Ashok Ananthula - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant Proxy Engineering at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Cloud gateway has strengthened remote web security and now needs better Mac and ISP support
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent for the Mac agents. That is where in 2025, we had to migrate to the Palo Alto-based platform. If your use case is for just Windows laptops,you can consider this platform as an option One issue is the data center resiliency part. In India especially, they are not tied up with the Tier 1 ISPs like Tata or Airtel; they were having Tier 2 ISPs and encountered many issues reaching few major sites that my organization depends on, and they were having problems that they could not fix quickly. They also lack a mechanism to route that traffic within their data center; rather, they ask customers to make a pac file change to route it to Singapore explicitly. It would be better if they route from their backend , i mean even if I send it to India DC, they should be able to route it internally to make that work; however, they fail to do that and ask the customer to route it in the pac file. Another suggestion is that in China, they do not have the proper setup; they used to have numerous problems with slowness and lack of premium circuits in China as well. That leads to multiple sites working slowly with latency-related issues. So the main issue is the ISP-related problems that need to be solved.
Senior Cyber Security Consultant at KoçSistem
Has provided reliable policy controls and secure web access for large enterprises
I consider Cloudflare when evaluating centralized access control features; Cloudflare utilizes multi-factor authentication and full API support, while F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) needs to enhance its API support. I recommend F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) for large companies such as Tüpraş and Ford. Tüpraş is one of the biggest companies in Turkey, along with other customers such as Tofaş, Euroko, Koç Holding, and more. For on-premises deployment, I would rate it a 10. For cloud deployment, I would rate it a seven. I primarily use it on-premises. I rate F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) eight out of ten.
Muhammad Asif Shaikh - PeerSpot reviewer
Deputy GM - IT at a manufacturing company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Designed to provide comprehensive and secure internet access with high visibility into users
After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with its own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Valuable features: Within the filter: Controls (Web categories, applications, and Allow/Block list) and Network (local Subnets). Within the reporter: Logs (Event Log) and Reports."
"Because of iboss, I did not have to assign web filtering tasks to my techs on a daily basis."
"Granular setup, which was able to set different levels of filters using the OUs in the AD."
"iboss is definitely very good in terms of service."
"We were impressed by the solution's mental health function, which can detect if someone needs help. It scans what users are browsing and flags warning signs so we can check to see if they are okay. We've had to use it a couple of times."
"I would definitely recommend iboss for web filtering purposes to other organizations or individuals."
"As I mentioned, the return on investment is significant, as it saved our office locations' bandwidth because when you are working remotely at home, your internet traffic routes directly to iboss and will not go to your office building, saving bandwidth bottlenecks and ensuring that issues with our building internet circuits will not impact your internet connectivity because you are directly going to the iboss data center."
"From a corporate perspective, I understand that it's important to keep the company data safe."
"It was very stable, the solution itself."
"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"The load balancing features are valuable."
"We have seen a return on investment from F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager. It provided access at a time when we didn't have it."
"The product allows us to create customized portals for your users."
"I rate the overall solution nine out of ten."
"The product is stable, I haven't noticed any bugs or glitches, and I haven't seen it crash or freeze, so it seems to be reliable and the performance is good."
"The F5 Access Policy Manager is something that I have experience with and I am happy with it."
"The most significant aspect is the control it offers over internet traffic, like managing computer access to specific sites such as Facebook. I find particular value in its ability to control the depth of internal traffic, enabling actions like blocking specific file extensions on social media or specific IPs. This control by categories is a standout feature for us in Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG)."
"The solution is interoperable and has centralized management."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"To scale up, a new iboss Node Blade Chassis must be purchased."
"The dashboards for local use could be better."
"Sometimes, obviously, there are bugs."
"The reporting feature needs improvement."
"I'd like to see them accelerate development on the security side, particularly around data loss prevention."
"iboss can be improved because the integration could be better; you need to import all the sites that you access today, and there are a few problems whenever you import thousands of websites, making the integration process messy for the users."
"The reporting feature needs improvement. It doesn't give you the expected results. It is quite difficult to get the specific reports needed, and it is not as intuitive as the rest of the platform."
"I am currently doing a PoC of the zero trust aspect of it. Compared to other similar solutions, it is hard to get around each feature. It takes a while to get used to it."
"Cloud services are something that F5 Access Policy Manager could do better."
"The stability of the F5 BIG-IP APM could be better."
"Integrating identity providers and single sign-on solutions can simplify user authentication and access control."
"The technical support’s response time must be improved."
"If I could copy and paste objects instead of picking and configuring them from scratch each time, it would be great."
"I have had a lot of issues in the past few months with the agents, which was disappointing."
"The solution is pretty technical. The initial setup is complex."
"The solution is quite costly."
"The solution's logging system should be improved because its logs are not precise and are a little confusing."
"In Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG), its speed is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"After my purchase, I noticed a need for improvements, particularly in the area of identifying the source user of the device, which can sometimes roll back to the base. Additionally, there were challenges with SSL gate traffic, which wasn't functioning as effectively as expected. Even though there have been fixes to these issues, they should be inherent to the product and need further attention. These aspects, especially sub-features, aren't very robust and seem complex. Regarding integration, while Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) integrates well with their own products, its compatibility with third-party tools like QB is limited. There's room for improvement in making protocols compatible with various third-party products."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We had the cost of purchasing a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs. However, the following year, the cost of just licensing was similar to what was paid the previous year for a new appliance along with the implementation and licensing costs."
"It is expensive compared to one of its competitors."
"The overall pricing for iboss is very competitive and transparent."
"It is probably in line with other solutions, but I do not deal with the financial side."
"It is not expensive, and it is also not cheap. iboss is priced right in the sweet spot for the number of features it offers."
"We have not priced the solution recently, but they were competitive with other vendors in the past."
"Recently, they have simplified the licensing"
"The product is very expensive."
"The tool is a little bit expensive."
"I rate the tool's pricing an eight out of ten."
"I rate the product pricing a five or six out of ten on a scale of one to ten."
"It is one of the reason for choosing it over other available products. However, recently, this year, there have been recurring concerns. I believe we might consider migrating to another solution."
"The solution’s pricing is cheaper than any other solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Secure Web Gateways (SWG) solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
8%
Construction Company
6%
Construction Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise7
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise9
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with iboss?
The problem our organization had is that iboss failed for the Mac devices. It is not able to give a successful agent ...
What is your primary use case for iboss?
We used iBoss mainly for Internet Access by having an Agent on Windows laptops Primarily because when we try to use i...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for iboss?
I am not involved in pricing, but as per the information I have, during that time, the Blue Coat proxies we were usin...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 products are more expensive than other solutions but are valued for their quality and reliability, akin to purchas...
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is not user-friendly and operates slowly. Additional features for architecture ...
What is your primary use case for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
I am using F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) along with Bot Management, API Gateway, API Security, and F5 Cloud. ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

iBoss Cloud Platform
F5 Access Policy Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

More than 4,000 global enterprises trust the iboss Cloud Platform to support their modern workforces, including a large number of Fortune 50 companies.
City Bank, Ricacorp Properties, Miele, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs. Sangfor Internet Access Gateway (IAG) and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.