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

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

Why PeerSpot?
 

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 (30th)
 

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 11.4%, down 15.7% compared to last year.
Sangfor EasyConnect, on the other hand, focuses on Enterprise Infrastructure VPN, holds 1.7% mindshare, up 1.4% since last year.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)11.4%
NetScaler11.7%
HAProxy8.3%
Other68.6%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Sangfor EasyConnect1.7%
OpenVPN Access Server9.1%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks6.4%
Other82.8%
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

"Valuable features include Link Controller and Server Load Balancer."
"One of the greatest things about F5 Load Balancer is that it provides additional capability for handling huge workloads and routing them to an SAP or non-SAP application. It is capable of supporting a large amount of user workload and application connectivity workload. This was the main reason why we chose F5."
"As a pure network engineer, I think the box is performing very well."
"In my team, we work in a very agile environment and the solutions from BIG-IP, including BIG-IP WAF, suit us well when developing and serving our applications."
"I have found F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) to be stable."
"Features such as SSL offloading, various balancing methods, and the ability to work with HTTP, HTTPS, or TCP protocols are beneficial."
"ASM for WAF."
"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."
"The solution is easy to use and has a straightforward user interface."
 

Cons

"They are expensive."
"F5 lateral scalability within the container is still restricted."
"Recently, I've seen one of the attacks on this particular network, where they managed to bypass its multi-factor authentication."
"It requires a particular skill or training before being able to manage it."
"Older OS releases may have had some bugs (active/active on reboot, I think we saw on one OS version)."
"I would like to see F-5 implement a regular routing like in other Linux-based devices. When we try and integrate in some complex networks, we have to use some additional routing scenarios from a Layer 3 perspective, then we have some problems. It would be great if this were fixed somehow."
"When WAF is enabled, you can see a decrease in performance."
"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"
"The design of the user interface could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am a fan of using AWS natively. It is much cheaper."
"The tool is a bit expensive."
"It is quite expensive as a product. Because it is very stable, it is also expensive."
"The cost is high for this product, so it's not suitable for small customers, e.g. those with small environments."
"The price of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is too high."
"F5 pricing is too high, compared to Citrix."
"It's not a cheap product, but there are no other replacements for what we do with it."
"This product is costly from a licensing perspective considering its competitors."
"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.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

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: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.