We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Perimeter 81 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."It has so many features. First of all, it has a full proxy architecture, it has multiple modules. The best feature is the WAF, the web application firewall module. It also has cashing type capabilities. It has all kinds of load-balancing algorithms based on your IT requirements."
"it has TCP LAN and WAN optimization features. It has has caching."
"Great load balancing."
"The solution could improve the ease of use, the management could be simplified. Other solutions are easier to use."
"LTM's most valuable features include application security, data collection, and parameter-level rules."
"The load balancing function, the monitors that you can create, and iRules programmability are most valuable."
"We like is how they integrate nicely with the Oracle PeopleSoft application."
"The occasion in which we needed technical support, we didn't have problems with them, because they always answered our questions without any trouble."
"Perimeter 81 has increased my security and privacy while maintaining solid internet performance."
"The benefits are really built into the underlying protocol, however, Perimeter81 makes these available in a user-friendly way."
"The ease of use not only translates to quick adoption rates - it also ensures that our employees remain compliant with our cybersecurity protocols, enhancing the overall security posture of our organization."
"It connects quickly and stays connected. The user interface is pretty neat too. The app has in-house support with user guides that give you step-by-step walkthroughs on navigating the app. In addition, there is a live chat feature that offers prompt assistance on the go."
"Perimeter 81 provides a very secure and non-disruptive experience."
"It helps to quickly get access to the pages I need."
"Our operators can work from home without any problems."
"The feature that I have found to be most valuable is the reputation that the company has regarding privacy. Nowadays, this is critical, especially when you do all of your work online."
"I think the logging could be improved."
"Reporting could be improved and configuration made easier."
"The UI could be improved."
"An expensive solution for the minimal features we use."
"I would like to see improvement in the manageability and easier setup."
"The license terms for "non-commercial" will be a challenge for us."
"Logging is a bit of a problem. Logging and monitoring are only in plain text. You have to search and you have to know what you are searching for to find anything. So of course, monitoring and getting alerts for abnormal situations is hard. There are no tools for monitoring and alerts"
"My only point of contention would be that it is a little pricey."
"It would be nice to have a notification sound when Perimeter81 disconnects, as I sometimes don't notice when the icon shows that it's disconnected, and I end up wasting time waiting for my browser to load a page that shows an error, usually error 404."
"The platform still lacks relevant dashboards and the ability to customize them based on our needs."
"There are a few areas where the solution could be improved. For instance, we sometimes encounter connectivity issues, which can be problematic. Recently, I experienced a connectivity issue while trying to move to Azure. Connectivity issues can be quite frustrating."
"The overall UI could be improved and updated to bring a simpler feel to the application."
"I don't know if it is technically feasible, however, if the Desktop App could be used as a Web App or a Chrome Extension it would be very nice."
"I have found that the log-in/out process takes quite some time."
"Offering in-app explanations detailing what each feature does, its benefits and potential use cases can help users better understand and utilize the tool to its full potential."
"Its initial setup process is complex for a hybrid environment."
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 116 reviews while Perimeter 81 is ranked 5th in ZTNA as a Service with 22 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Perimeter 81 is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Perimeter 81 writes "Great SAML and SCIM support with the ability to deploy site-2-site tunnels with specific IP restrictions". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and HAProxy, whereas Perimeter 81 is most compared with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cloudflare Access and Tailscale.
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.
