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

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

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 8, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
6.6
Many companies found F5 BIG-IP LTM beneficial for security and deployment, with mixed views on ROI depending on pricing.
Sentiment score
5.7
LoadBalancer Enterprise enhances network reliability and security, crucial for VoIP, while being cost-effective and vital for continuous operations.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
F5 BIG-IP LTM support experiences vary, with mixed reviews on responsiveness, knowledge, community resources, and regional support efficacy.
Sentiment score
8.0
Loadbalancer Enterprise's support is praised for expertise and responsiveness, despite minor delays; users highly value their reliability.
Customer support is quite good but could be faster.
Network Engineer at Stryker
Overall, my experience with F5 is very good compared to Radware.
Project Manager at IBM
I would rate the technical support of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) nine out of ten.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
F5 BIG-IP LTM offers scalable integration with AWS, suitable for enterprises, but requires careful sizing to avoid constraints.
Sentiment score
7.8
LoadBalancer Enterprise excels in scalability, handling high loads smoothly, though some face hardware and budget constraints.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
F5 BIG-IP LTM is stable and reliable, with occasional bugs manageable through updates, supported by responsive customer service.
Sentiment score
7.9
LoadBalancer Enterprise is stable and reliable, with minimal issues and high stability ratings, suitable for production environments.
 

Room For Improvement

F5 BIG-IP LTM needs better cost-effectiveness, user interface, cloud integration, documentation, security, automation, and a flexible licensing model.
LoadBalancer Enterprise needs simplified configuration, enhanced scalability, API access, improved security, lower pricing, and better Metaswitch integration.
I expect faster resolutions when providing contact numbers while raising cases, as other companies typically do.
Network Engineer at Stryker
The pricing of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is on the higher side compared to competitors, but it is worth it.
Project Manager at IBM
 

Setup Cost

F5 BIG-IP LTM is feature-rich but costly, especially in AWS; consult F5 for tailored licensing options.
Enterprise users find LoadBalancer Enterprise offers good value, with negotiable costs, affordable upgrades, and competitive pricing options.
 

Valuable Features

F5 BIG-IP LTM excels in load balancing, security, and customization, enhancing performance and reliability for complex network environments.
LoadBalancer Enterprise provides reliable, user-friendly load balancing with scalability and efficiency, ensuring consistent service with low latency and essential integrations.
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.
Project Manager at IBM
R-series has better CPU and memory, leading to higher throughput with minimal downtime, making it a significant improvement over the I-series.
Network Engineer at Stryker
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.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
 

Categories and Ranking

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
LoadBalancer Enterprise
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
14th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 14.3%, down from 15.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of LoadBalancer Enterprise is 4.3%, up from 3.4% 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)14.3%
LoadBalancer Enterprise4.3%
Other81.4%
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.
Nigus Machin Amare - PeerSpot reviewer
CTO at Malam Engineering PLC
Load management and balancing efficiency that's flexible
Our primary use case for Loadbalancer.org is on the presale point for clients who use the solution for balancing loads The most valuable features of Loadbalancer.org are related to its load balancing capabilities. There is room for improvement in Loadbalancer.org in certain areas. For a…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Construction Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business62
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise86
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP?
The pricing of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is on the higher side compared to competitors, but it is worth it.
What is your primary use case for F5 BIG-IP?
Our main use cases involve multiple applications, so we are using F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) services, and we are using WAF and ASM services to secure those applications and load balance...
Do you recommend Loadbalancer.org?
Since Loadbalancer.org is an open-source solution, I would recommend this solution for smaller businesses that don’t have major scaling requirements and don’t have the budget for a commercial solut...
What needs improvement with Loadbalancer.org?
There is room for improvement in Loadbalancer.org in certain areas.
 

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.
Vodafone, NASA, Mercedes, NBC, Siemens, AT&T, Barclays, Zurich, Penn State University, Fiserv, Canon, Toyota, University of Cambridge, US Army, US Navy, Ocean Spray, ASOS, Pfizer, BBC, Bacardi, Monsoon, River Island, U.S Air Force, King's College London, NHS, Ricoh, Philips, Santander, TATA Communications, Ericcson, Ross Video, Evertz, TalkTalk TV, Giacom, Rapid Host.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. LoadBalancer Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
883,760 professionals have used our research since 2012.