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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
117
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HAProxy
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Service Mesh (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 13.1%, down from 16.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HAProxy is 15.1%, up from 13.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
Service Mesh
9.3%
 

Featured Reviews

KV
Jun 28, 2022
Industry leader; no one comes close in terms of specs
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is scalable. That's one of the reasons I always went for it. Some of the clients I have worked with have been Fortune 100 companies with thousands and thousands of servers they needed front-ended. Some of these sites had multiple thousands of web instances that needed to be load balanced. We were also doing both local and global load balancing. We'd use a global load balancer that would point to local load balancing that would port it out within a specific data center. These clients had millions of end users. I believe that nearly all of those organizations ended up increasing their load balancing platform environment.
KS
Jul 20, 2022
Beneficial open source functionality, scalable, but support documentation lacking
We are using HAProxy for load balancing The most valuable feature of HAProxy is that its open source. HAProxy could improve by making the dashboards easier to use, and better reports and administration tickets. I have been using HAProxy for approximately eight years. HAProxy is stable. The…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Stable and scalable network traffic management solution for applications. It has good performance."
"We are using Application Security Manager (ASM) as a web application firewall, where there is a security signature to avoid a web level breach."
"We have found the consistency of the application always being the way it is supposed to be as its most valuable feature."
"The load balancing function, the monitors that you can create, and iRules programmability are most valuable."
"I have found F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) to be stable."
"it has TCP LAN and WAN optimization features. It has has caching."
"The value and impact of using F5 BIG-IP LTM for application delivery control in our organization are significant."
"We like the capability to combine the content switching with the intrusion prevention and adding the security roles, so we can expose certain sub-pieces outside without exposing everything."
"Having the right load balancing solution – which is what HAProxy is – and protection in place gives organizations peace of mind."
"HAProxy's TCP load balancer is excellent and super stable."
"HAProxy Enterprise Edition has been rock solid. We have essentially had no downtime caused by our load balancers in the last 10 months, because they’ve worked so well. Previously, our load balancers caused us multiple hours per year in downtime."
"We use it as a load balancer for our application servers."
"We don't have a problem with the user interface. it's good."
"Advanced traffic rules, including stick tables and ACLs, which allow me to shape traffic while it's load balanced."
"The ability to handle a sequence of front- and back-ends gives the user the opportunity to send traffic through different services."
"Software defined load balancing allows us to dynamically adjust and codify routing decisions. This speeds up development."
 

Cons

"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."
"Native support for containers should be added to future releases, as this is the future of load balancing."
"I'm not very sure about the security with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). We have our own private data center, but we are going to migrate our private data center into the Azure cloud environment. Security will then be a major concern when we migrate our own whole infrastructure to the public cloud."
"I would like there to be more device security. I would like the tool to support SSL links, along with SSL and TLS."
"Not everything is intuitive."
"The user interface could be improved in F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager."
"To improve the product, they could add more load balancing solutions in Kubernetes."
"It would possibly help to get more training, even better in local languages."
"We've changed solutions as it doesn't fit with our current needs."
"If nbproc = 2, you will have two processes of HAProxy running. However, the stats of HAProxy will not be aggregated, meaning you don't really know the collective status in a single point of view."
"HAProxy is very weak in the logging and monitoring part and requires improvement."
"Maybe HAProxy could be more modular."
"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."
"HAProxy could do with some good combination integrations."
"I would like to evaluate load-balancing algorithms other than round robin and SSL offloading. Also, it would be helpful if I could logically divide the HAProxy load-balancing into multiple entities so that I would install one HA Proxy LB application which could be used for different Web servers for different applications. I am not sure if these features are available."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model. It could be cheaper."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would recommend that the cost be lowered."
"The solution is more expensive than one of its competitors."
"The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition."
"Great product for the money. But they can get really expensive, so get what meets your needs."
"It's fair, it's not too expensive. Maybe just a little high."
"You can buy it on a yearly basis, or you can go for a subscription. For on-premise boxes, it is just the RMA."
"LTM is a good product, but it's expensive. They should make it more competitive because cloud providers offer free load balancing. Cloud providers can't cover all the security aspects of F5, but you get a decent amount of security. Cloud environments are becoming the norm across the IT industry. Many of the larger companies that previously used on-prem infrastructure are switching to the cloud, so companies like Fortinet and Palo Alto are reducing their prices. Otherwise, they can't compete in the cloud."
"When we purchased additional licenses for our other locations, we received a discount of between 20% and 25%."
"If you don't have expertise then go with the licensed version. Otherwise, open-source is the best solution."
"HAProxy is free in the initial offer. However, pricing can be improved."
"When it comes to pricing HAProxy is free."
"Test/lab virtual machines can be installed without a licence. They can't be used for performance testing but otherwise behave like production nodes."
"The only cost is for the image manager, who is responsible for uploading the image, and that is trivial."
"HAProxy is a free open-source solution."
"HAProxy is free software. There are optional paid products (support/appliances)."
"The product is open source."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
789,442 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about F5 BIG-IP?
The support from F5 BIG-IP LTM is good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 BIG-IP?
There are a few licensing options available for F5 BIG-IP LTM. You can have a perpetual license which is a lifetime license. You then only need to renew the support, if you choose to open a ticket ...
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP?
The pricing must be more flexible. We get billed for firewalls based on the usage. It will be helpful if the solution provides such flexibility.
Do you recommend HAProxy?
I do recommend HAProxy for more simple applications or for companies with a low budget, since HAProxy is a free, open-source product. HAProxy is also a good choice for someone looking for a stable ...
What do you like most about HAProxy?
The solution is effective in managing our traffic.
 

Also Known As

F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
HAProxy Community Edition, HAProxy Enterprise Edition, HAPEE
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Booking.com, GitHub, Reddit, StackOverflow, Tumblr, Vimeo, Yelp
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. HAProxy and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
789,442 professionals have used our research since 2012.