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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs SecureLink vs Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)14.3%
NetScaler12.7%
Fortinet FortiADC9.7%
Other63.3%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SecureLink0.9%
OpenVPN Access Server13.3%
Fortinet FortiClient6.8%
Other79.0%
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform9.5%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks11.8%
Cato SASE Cloud Platform9.8%
Other68.9%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

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.
FS
Deputy Head of IT at a legal firm with 501-1,000 employees
Efficient technical support with good synchronization features, but it needs better security
We would like to be to secure access to all of the servers for all of the internal workers and engineers. We would like to have tools that provide us with security for our servers. I would like to see an improved repository to better see the users. We have a new project that requires a lot of security we will not continue with SecureLink. The security features offered in SecureLink are not enough.
Zaheer_Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
Secure access has improved remote work and has reduced vulnerabilities across our workforce
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform probably needs to be more efficient because scanning takes a lot of time. Some vulnerabilities create issues, and when we wanted to identify the source of the vulnerabilities, specifically focusing on mobile ID and related areas, it was unable to provide assistance. However, according to discussions with Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, they said that by the end of mid-2026, they are exploring these features, and probably those features can be incorporated or embedded into this particular system. That is the only major negative point.In terms of responses, Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is good. In terms of controlling vulnerability, it is good. The only cons I have noticed is that it is a bit slower, and sometimes it is unable to identify the source. These are the key areas for improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The BigIP F5 tool is applicable to all types of infrastructure and I would recommend this tool to others."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is a perfect product for load balancing and WAF, and I would recommend it far more than any other product."
"Our experience has been a positive one."
"LTM is a full-reverse proxy, handling connections from clients."
"When I put F5 into my network, it works better."
"The solution is very powerful and quite flexible, and the horizontal scalability that is on offer is very good as well."
"It has helped a lot to protect our organization from external attacks, especially XSS or XSRF types of attacks."
"We've been quite satisfied with the capabilities of the product."
"The most valuable feature is synchronizing the limited access for partners or sub-contractors."
"Technical support is very efficient and very supportive."
"It has some good data security and WIP features, providing secure Internet access."
"Overall, the solution does a pretty good job at web filtering."
"I like the web filtering capabilities, which are very good, and it offers sound internet security notifications with a stable, scalable solution and an easy-to-use user interface."
"I find all Zscaler Private Access features valuable because each replaces flawed technologies, such as EPAs being replacements for VPN and PR as a replacement for PAM, so I can't mention only one valuable feature. Overall, Zscaler Private Access is a good solution."
"The scalability is pretty good."
"It's one of the easier products on the market as far as set-ups and deployments. Even across their whole product suite, they've made it pretty simple."
"The product provides a seamless user experience."
"Two great features that we really like on the solution are the Internet Access and Private Access."
 

Cons

"It's a very expensive solution."
"The pricing could be improved."
"The solution's initial setup process was quite complex. I"
"Technical support could be improved."
"The user interface could be improved in F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager."
"Ultimately, the service has not affected our customers. However, there was a failure in one of the nodes that became infected. F5 BIG-IP did not sense that the virus was there. The security didn't function."
"Security and Reporting."
"There are not very many areas for improvement, but the price is high."
"The security features offered in SecureLink are not enough."
"The security features offered in SecureLink are not enough."
"The pre-defined dictionaries could be improved."
"The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects."
"There could be additional ways to define proximity. Additionally, they should provide some exclusion options for specific policies and an ability to control the DLP engine."
"I rate it a seven because I am still working through some kinks from a performance and a support perspective."
"It would be better if the Zscaler Private Access team made it easier for people to find subscriptions on the portal, mainly information on what my customers subscribed to or the type of licenses purchased."
"The product must allow users to check logs for an entire year in the local console."
"The pricing for Private Access seems to be on the expensive side, and I believe they should consider making it more competitive with other solutions."
"More on-prem infrastructure is required when Zscaler Private Access is to be implemented as a single point of entry."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is a bit expensive product. Kemp Loadmaster is much cheaper than F5. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. It can be for one year or three years."
"I would recommend that the cost be lowered."
"The price of F5 BIG-IP LTM could improve."
"F5 isn’t cheap but is worth the price."
"The licensing model of F5 BIG-IP LTM is highly complex. The operation cost of the solution is high. The overall cost is high."
"F5 is more expensive than other solutions, so you have to be sure F5 is the best solution to fit the requirements."
"It is quite expensive as a product. Because it is very stable, it is also expensive."
"We purchased through the AWS Marketplace because it was a popular way to go, and we were intrigued. The price of this product is not an issue. They have good pricing and licensing."
"We are not happy with the recent increase in the price."
"The pricing is expensive and on the higher end. Honestly, in my opinion, it is not worth the price."
"It has been relatively reasonable for what it does. Some of the additional license costs based on the advanced next-generation firewall functions are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Overall, the cost seems reasonable."
"In terms of market positioning, I would describe Zscaler Private Access as offering optimal pricing. Based on our experience, Cato Networks tends to be slightly more expensive."
"The product is a little more expensive than other tools."
"As per industry leads, Zscaler CASB is an expensive solution."
"Zscaler CASB is an expensive solution."
"The technical support is good."
"It is an auto-renewal subscription service."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Healthcare Company
19%
Construction Company
11%
Computer Software Company
7%
Hospitality Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business62
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise86
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise43
 

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; someti...
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 ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure ac...
What do you like most about Zscaler SASE?
The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability.
What needs improvement with Zscaler SASE?
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
 

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
Zscaler SASE, Zscaler DLP, Zscaler CASB, Zscaler CSPM, Zscaler Browser Isolation, Zscaler Posture Control
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
NISC, Sotera Wireless, InterSystems, Allscripts, Cerner, Allscripts
Siemens, AutoNation, GE, NOV
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, NetScaler, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: March 2026.
885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.