We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Loadbalancer.org 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."The feature I find the most valuable is the support infrastructure."
"The tech support we got from F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager directly was pretty good."
"Currently, it's distributing the load perfectly, as per my understanding of our requirements."
"We have multiple solutions we can deploy through the F5."
"The stability is excellent."
"It is stable."
"The most valuable features are the WAF and the big IP."
"The product is quite flexible."
"For now, it's stable."
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix."
"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are the ease of managing the logs on the WAFs, the ease to identify break-in attempts into the network, the front-end firewall, and a more specific firewall."
"The performance is good."
"It's pretty much a Swiss Army knife for managing all the load balancing techniques."
"Loadbalancer is easy to use. It performs well, with low latency."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is sometimes a bit cumbersome to deal with some builds, although that's gotten significantly better over the years."
"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."
"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."
"F5 could improve the rule-setting capabilities in the GUI, and they need to simplify web management. For example, the menus in the Citrix GUI are easier to navigate, with a clean structure and layout."
"The pricing could always be better. It's a bit expensive."
"It requires a particular skill or training before being able to manage it."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager could improve by having an FNI feature for a single source to multi-domain 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."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"The solution can be a bit pricey."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
"Loadbalancer.org's complexity could be reduced."
"The interface from Loadbalancer.org should be improved."
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 46 reviews while Loadbalancer.org is ranked 9th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 8 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Loadbalancer.org is rated 8.0. 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 Loadbalancer.org writes "Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised ". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC and HAProxy, whereas Loadbalancer.org is most compared with HAProxy, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster, Fortinet FortiADC and NGINX Plus. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Loadbalancer.org 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.
