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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall vs VMWare Avi Load Balancer 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 13.0%, down from 15.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall is 2.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of VMWare Avi Load Balancer is 4.9%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)13.0%
VMWare Avi Load Balancer4.9%
Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall2.1%
Other80.0%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

edshyaa - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at Stryker
Load balancing has improved traffic distribution and currently supports high availability upgrades
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) offers effective load balancing methods that help distribute traffic across our servers, whether we have two or several. This load balancing feature stands out as it is the fundamental work we do with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). While I recognize there are many features, such as iRules, which I have not explored yet, we primarily work on VIPs, pool members, and traffic distribution. The load balancing algorithms' flexibility makes them very useful for our team, enabling us to choose different servers and manage load effectively. We use various methods based on user or application requirements, making the algorithms set up by F5 in the backend quite helpful. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) positively impacts our organization primarily through its load balancing capabilities. We avoid traffic overload on individual servers by placing backend servers behind F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) VIP. This load balancing helps us manage traffic effectively. Since the configuration of the I-series, we have had smooth performance, and with the recent migration to the R-series, it is working faster than before, providing positive outcomes for our operations. Since moving to the R-series, I notice improved performance; it is user-friendly and handles traffic efficiently. The upgrading process is different as we create tenants and a main host. R-series has better CPU and memory, leading to higher throughput with minimal downtime, making it a significant improvement over the I-series.
MD
Consultant at a consultancy with 1-10 employees
Good feature set and is simple to deploy
In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else. We sort of stopped deploying them because of that. There are additional costs to the standard licensing. There are bandwidth prices. The feature set is quite good. We've been told to stop using them because of the price. If they can do something to address that I believe it would be better. On the latest version they've got a community edition, which is quite a good bandwidth, but in essence, it's to address the entry-level price. When you get to 10 gig bandwidth, it's way too expensive.
Suleiman  Mohammed - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Database Engineer, SRE at Interswitch Group
Improved database high availability has simplified failover and optimized read write routing
In my opinion, VMWare Avi Load Balancer is a complicated tool with many advanced features that can be beneficial, but policies are powerful yet difficult to debug when traffic behaves unexpectedly or becomes heavy. This complexity can make it challenging to pinpoint where a request goes. The need for policy execution tracing to simplify debugging is evident because if connections are routed incorrectly, for example, directly to a replica, debugging can become painful in production. There are still improvements to be made, particularly in simpler policy debugging. A clearer view of traffic routing for each database would greatly enhance the experience.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP LTM is it helps our delivery team to make policies and rules for application."
"BIG-IP LTM's most valuable feature is that it allows you to seamlessly add more servers without impacting your application's configuration."
"It is a fast and available solution."
"The impact of SSL offloading on reducing server load and latency is very much positive because whatever traffic we receive, we encrypt at our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) level, which has definitely reduced the additional load and SSL decryption load on the servers, so it has very much helped us and it is very smooth; it will not take much time and will not impact our regular traffic."
"It is really awesome; you can scale from one or two servers to hundreds of servers, they have all the modules that a customer needs, and you can go for on-premise or cloud deployment so you can have whatever you need."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) improves the resilience and quality of the application itself, the speed and the user experience for the application. The data that the users need from the application is actually acquired faster. So, it provides faster data acquisition."
"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."
"BIG-IP LTM is completely stable, and its performance is good."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is simple to deploy. The deployment took us ten minutes."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is simple to deploy."
"Its visibility and login mechanism are the best parts. In addition to the great visibility it has a great dashboard and an easy to configure graphic user interface, a beautiful GUI."
"It is more common in the market, so it is easier to use because it is more common."
"Moving from a legacy solution to a newer one has provided us with tangible returns."
"The friendly user interface is valuable."
"VMWare Avi Load Balancer has created a smoother failover process without issues, keeping the state normal, where typically there would be manual intervention, and time lost went from potentially five minutes down to under thirty seconds with Avi, resulting in no recorded incidents."
"The integration into the host environment is the most valuable aspect right now."
"The WAF - the web application firewall itself - is great."
"The solution is stable."
 

Cons

"It would possibly help to get more training, even better in local languages."
"Reporting could be improved and configuration made easier."
"F5 could improve the rule-setting capabilities in the GUI, and they need to simplify web management."
"The ASM administration is quite complex."
"I wouldn't recommend the tool to small companies, considering its high price and the infrastructure needs of small businesses."
"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."
"The solution could improve the documentation."
"Native support for containers should be added to future releases, as this is the future of load balancing."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered; we've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else."
"IDS and IPS sites need to be more progressive."
"One struggle with Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is its integration with other VMware products."
"I did not go with it because their APM module is a different product altogether. It's a common thing that companies do. They sell something and then they add on top of it as a different product. It is a type of marketing strategy. But when it comes to the overall management, it takes a lot of time to really look into it."
"Avi Networks is great. It could be good for a small company, but for the whole municipality, it's just not good enough."
"In terms of improvement, the pricing and documentation need improvement. We have had problems getting the documents."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"It doesn't match the development structure or user community of our existing product. It pales in comparison to that."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Though functionality is high, its cost can be considered slightly higher than its competitors​."
"Try to negotiate all the software features that you require upfront."
"F5 is more expensive than other solutions, so you have to be sure F5 is the best solution to fit the requirements."
"It is sort of a commodity product. A load balancer is a load balancer. What will be, at the end of the day, the cheapest option or have the best performance, that is what it will come down to."
"F5 is expensive."
"Compared to using open-source products, the prices are not cheap."
"BIG-IP LTM is considered a premium product, so it's quite expensive and isn't affordable for all customers."
"It is a little pricey. I wish the pricing was cheaper, but I wish the pricing was cheaper for everything."
Information not available
"The licensing costs for Avi Networks Software Load Balancer are really variable. The product can be sold from a bandwidth utilization perspective. It can be sold from a per CPU perspective, depending on if you're looking at on-premises or hyperscale environments. Licensing costs vary quite a bit if you're familiar with the AWS Calculator, where you can see that it can widely vary per licensing model. On a scale of one to five, with one being not very good value for the money and five being great, I would rate the pricing for Avi Networks Software Load Balancer a five because its pricing is extremely competitive. Not all features are included with the license, for example, there's single licensing."
"I rate the solution price a four to five on a scale of one to ten, where one is low, and ten is high, since it is an affordable tool."
"With Avi Networks, you can buy a 10-Gig license and, if your primary data center goes down, in the flick of a switch you can move that license to your backup data center and it will generate the traffic... there are a lot of cost-effective measures."
"The tool is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
No data available
Financial Services Firm
18%
Comms Service Provider
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business62
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise86
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP?
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) could improve file upload speeds when opening cases and attaching files; someti...
What is your primary use case for F5 BIG-IP?
My main use case for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is placing our applications on F5 and the backend servers ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Avi Networks Software Load Balancer?
The issue with load balancers is that they are all the same. I would rate it seven. I do not recall VMWare Avi Load B...
What advice do you have for others considering Avi Networks Software Load Balancer?
We tested some scripts, but they did not fulfill everything. My recommendation is to reduce the price and make it two...
What is your primary use case for Avi Networks Software Load Balancer?
We are using native cloud capability. The issue is not from us. VMware changed their module. They are selling perpetu...
 

Also Known As

F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
Pulse vWAF, Pulse Virtual Traffic Manager
Avi Software Load Balancer
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Gilt Groupe
Palo Alto Networks, DGDean, Swisslos
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, NetScaler, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: April 2026.
896,202 professionals have used our research since 2012.