We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and HAProxy 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."What we like best about this solution is its stability. It is extremely stable."
"The stability is excellent."
"BIG-IP LTM's most valuable feature is that it allows you to seamlessly add more servers without impacting your application's configuration."
"Stable and scalable network traffic management solution for applications. It has good performance."
"The solution is very easy to use and easy to understand. It's quite an intuitive system."
"We enjoy its overall ease of use."
"The feature I find the most valuable is the support infrastructure."
"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."
"I can't speak to all of the HAProxy features because we don't use them all, but load balancing is very good."
"The most valuable feature of HAProxy is that its open source."
"The solution is user-friendly and efficient."
"The most valuable thing for me is TCP/IP Layer 4 stuff you can do with HAProxy. You can go down to the protocol level and make decisions on something."
"It is scalable."
"Stability is number one."
"HAProxy potentially has a good return on investment"
"The features I find valuable in this solution are session control which automatically disconnects users that forget to log off, and the ability to write rules to either allow or block certain file requests."
"The GUI needs improvement."
"Its scalability and deployment should be better. It should be more scalable, and it should be easier to deploy."
"The user experience for dashboards and reports can be improved. They should make dashboards and the reporting system easier for users. They need to add more reports to the dashboard. Currently, for complicated reports, I have to do the customization. It should have more integration with network firewalls to be able to gather all the information required for traffic management."
"An area for improvement in F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is that it's a high-priced product."
"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."
"BIG-IP LTM's sandboxing integration could be improved."
"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."
"Technical support could be faster. It's something I'd like to see them work on in the future."
"The GUI should be more responsive and show the detailed output of logs."
"The reconfigurability in terms of the tooling could be improved and maybe an editor plugin can be added."
"HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets."
"The solution can be improved by controlling TCP behavior better and mandating to clients what the expected outcome must be in order to avoid receiving contestant timeout logs."
"Documentation could be improved."
"While troubleshooting, we are having some difficulties. There are no issues when it is running; it is stable and very good; however, if there is a troubleshooting issue or an incident occurs, we will have issues because this is open-source."
"I would like to see better search handling, and a user interface, with a complete functional graphical unit"
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 39 reviews while HAProxy is ranked 5th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 12 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while HAProxy is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Great support, helpful documentation, and is user-friendly". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HAProxy writes "You can go down to the protocol level and make decisions on something". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas HAProxy is most compared with NGINX Plus, Kemp LoadMaster, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Barracuda Web Application Firewall and Fortinet FortiADC. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. HAProxy 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.
