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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs Sangfor EasyConnect 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (1st)
Sangfor EasyConnect
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (24th)
 

Mindshare comparison

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Sangfor EasyConnect aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is designed for Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) and holds a mindshare of 13.6%, down 15.6% compared to last year.
Sangfor EasyConnect, on the other hand, focuses on Enterprise Infrastructure VPN, holds 1.3% mindshare, up 1.1% since last year.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)13.6%
NetScaler12.2%
Fortinet FortiADC9.3%
Other64.9%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Sangfor EasyConnect1.3%
OpenVPN Access Server12.6%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks6.2%
Other79.9%
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
 

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.
SH
Project Manager at Novu
Easy to use and has a straightforward user interface
The solution is very straightforward and easy to connect. Sangfor EasyConnect is quite a secured product. The solution is easy to use and has a straightforward user interface The design of the user interface could be improved. The solution should have an AI feature that provides proactive alerts…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In summary, this is a very good product and we are actively suggesting it to our customers."
"Where we are finding the AWS version helpful is when we are trying to scale up new environments. AWS Marketplace helps here a lot."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is a stable and reliable solution."
"Good application firewall."
"It improves the overall performance of applications by decreasing the burden on servers associated with managing and maintaining applications and network sessions, as well as by performing application-specific tasks."
"I think F5's tech support may be better than Citrix's because they mainly focus on the ADC product, but Citrix support covers Hypervisor, XenMobile, FAS, and ADC. And from my experience, sometimes, we face some issues that Citrix cannot handle."
"F5 Big-IP Local Traffic Manager has better modular features especially LTM, which according to the clients, is very beneficial, and most of the users opt for a combination of Big-IP LTM and WAF which helps them to leverage application load balancing and enhance application security many-fold."
"We have multiple solutions we can deploy through the F5."
"The solution is easy to use and has a straightforward user interface."
 

Cons

"The pricing model has caused some frustration. My clients implemented the solution and later wanted to upgrade the features but the pricing structure was complicated. There are other solutions with better pricing models."
"The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition."
"I would recommend that the cost be lowered."
"I would like to see better integration."
"It is a hardware load balancer, and its installation procedure is more complex than a software load balancer."
"We need best-practice information. They have something called DevCentral and a blog. But we want something from F5 itself regarding how to tackle the false-positive configurations. If you go into detail with so many configurations it will find so many false positives from the moment it is enabled that it will quickly impact your applications, and it will not work."
"Cloud native integration should be provided."
"Lacking in free training to help users understand the product more, so they would know how to correctly use it. Like other vendors and their products, becoming more proactive is an area for improvement."
"The design of the user interface could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product is costly from a licensing perspective considering its competitors."
"There are no additional fees to the standard licensing fee; everything is paid once."
"Security should be involved in any base license. When you bring on F5, you only have default license. Then, the ASM product license has to be purchased. It would be great if F5 could include the ASM in the base license."
"The solution is more expensive than one of its competitors."
"This solution comes with a standard license, and there are also extra licenses that can be obtained. The licenses are purchasable for durations of one, two, three, and five years. The hardware is something to consider when purchasing"
"The price is little bit on higher side compared to the cost of NGINX."
"F5 BIG-IP can be expensive, although there are trial versions available which are helpful to find out if the solution is right for your company."
"I am not aware of the exact cost of the product. However, it is expensive."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive and ten is cheap, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
892,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

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

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; sometimes, downloading files like QKView takes time, depending on size. I expect faste...
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 on the pool. We also regularly renew SSL certificates before they expire, usuall...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Sangfor EasyConnect?
On a scale from one to ten, where one is expensive and ten is cheap, I rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with Sangfor EasyConnect?
The design of the user interface could be improved. The solution should have an AI feature that provides proactive alerts when your infrastructure lacks best practices.
What advice do you have for others considering Sangfor EasyConnect?
We're quite equipped with resources for maintaining the solution. One person would be sufficient to maintain Sangfor EasyConnect. The solution’s integration with other Sangfor products is quite eas...
 

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.
Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM), The Royal Malaysian Customs Department, ShunSin Technology Holdings Limited, Carsem, Sunway University
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, HAProxy, NetScaler and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: April 2026.
892,287 professionals have used our research since 2012.