Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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

 

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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
122
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 16.1%, up from 15.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is 0.1%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)16.1%
F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition0.1%
Other83.8%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Bonieber  Orofeo - PeerSpot reviewer
Identifying compromised traffic and securing data has been a significant advantage
One of the most beneficial features of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is its ability to identify compromised traffic and its capabilities in authentication. Additionally, the security aspect of it provides a significant advantage as it helps us secure our data, which is a major investment and benefit for us. Before using this system, we had difficulties in storing our data and managing the traffic that comes in and out.
Lilian Blaitt - PeerSpot reviewer
Virtual deployment boosts efficiency and support is quick
In my company, we use NGINX. I don't work with NGINX. For us, it is better to have the virtual solution because we have more virtual VJPs on fewer machines. This is the reason we are using it today It's easy to use, and they have good support. When we open tickets, they are answered quickly, and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The iRule feature is very useful for inspecting HTTP. Sometimes, we use it for modifying the headers of the HTTP."
"In terms of stability, it is stable."
"The solution is easy to install. It's a straightforward process."
"The setup is pretty easy."
"The product is quite flexible."
"BIG-IP LTM's most valuable feature is that it allows you to seamlessly add more servers without impacting your application's configuration."
"The solution's stability is pretty good."
"It has made it a single entry point for all users, verging across all the VPCs. It is more of an SSO solution versus multitier user loggin."
"The features that I like include LTM and Global Traffic Manager (GTM)."
"It's easy to use, and they have good support."
"It has DoS layer 7 protection, which not many vendors have."
"The integration capabilities of the product are easy to use, and there is no complexity involved in it."
"I have a specific issue with the network interface connector, the NIC. We're limited to a maximum of two NICs in a virtualized environment. It's a limitation of the tool."
"The tool's investment is less than a physical device."
 

Cons

"Native support for containers should be added to future releases, as this is the future of load balancing."
"It is a hardware load balancer, and its installation procedure is more complex than a software load balancer. There are pros and cons of using hardware load balancing. You have to have specific hardware deployed in your data center to activate this load balancer. They never came up with any software-based load balancing solution. It is all hardware-based."
"They need to improve the interface and some of the functionalities."
"The logging features are too limited and do not give us a solid understanding of what's happening."
"It's a very expensive solution."
"The GUI needs improvement."
"We need best-practice information. They have something called DevCentral and a blog. But we want something from F5 itself regarding how to tackle the false-positive configurations. If you go into detail with so many configurations it will find so many false positives from the moment it is enabled that it will quickly impact your applications, and it will not work."
"Not everything is intuitive."
"The tool has limitations with respect to code and RAM."
"BIG-IP could improve in supporting microservices, for example, in Docker and Kubernetes environments."
"I have a specific issue with the network interface connector, the NIC. We're limited to a maximum of two NICs in a virtualized environment. It's a limitation of the tool."
"On-the-go upgrades are an option that the tool currently lacks, making it an area where improvements are required."
"F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is a heavy system that needs a lot of CPU, memory, and hard disk."
"It's expensive and could be cheaper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is cheaper than the average on the market."
"In my view, the cost is somewhat on the higher side. There are discounts available, but I wouldn't say it's overpriced. It's not cheap either, and the value for money is a bit higher from that perspective."
"Check other vendors like Cisco, Citrix or A10 Networks. There are plenty in the market with which you can achieve same thing."
"There are no additional fees to the standard licensing fee; everything is paid once."
"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."
"The price is high."
"BIG-IP LTM is considered a premium product, so it's quite expensive and isn't affordable for all customers."
"Our company pays for the licensing cost on a yearly basis. Also, there are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"My company's customers need to make payments for the licensing charges attached to the product. It is an expensive product."
"The pricing is standard."
"F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is an expensive solution, but it's worth the price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business62
Midsize Enterprise31
Large Enterprise84
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP?
The GUI of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) could be improved. It's not something regarding how it processes or blocks, as that's perfect. However, it still feels a bit legacy regarding the GU...
What is your primary use case for F5 BIG-IP?
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is a perfect product for load balancing and WAF, and I would recommend it far more than any other product. The load balancing capabilities of F5 BIG-IP Local T...
What do you like most about F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition?
The integration capabilities of the product are easy to use, and there is no complexity involved in it.
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition?
I find it too complex to assess the impact of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's automated deployment and integration with container orchestration platforms, such as Kubernetes and OpenShift, on my applic...
What advice do you have for others considering F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition?
I do not use the load balancing and traffic management features of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. I use other container orchestration platforms, but they are not relevant to F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. ...
 

Also Known As

F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.