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

F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition vs LoadBalancer Enterprise comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 27, 2025

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 Virtual Edition
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
11th
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
LoadBalancer Enterprise
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
13th
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 October 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is 0.1%. 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) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition0.1%
LoadBalancer Enterprise4.3%
Other95.6%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Lilian Blaitt - PeerSpot reviewer
Virtual deployment boosts efficiency and support is quick
In my company, we use NGINX. I don't work with NGINX. For us, it is better to have the virtual solution because we have more virtual VJPs on fewer machines. This is the reason we are using it today It's easy to use, and they have good support. When we open tickets, they are answered quickly, and…
Roger Seelaender - PeerSpot reviewer
Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised
The solution can be improved with the development of a SIP engine because it is difficult to manage SBCs. All SBCs are really tough to write rules for. If we could put this in front of an SBC to have the right rules to possibly block the traffic, that would be very helpful. The solution can also improve the relationship between Loadbalancer.org and Metaswitch, or now, Microsoft because Metaswitch was purchased by Microsoft. They both position themselves as certified but don't always talk to each other. I wish there would be closer integration between the solution and the vendors when either release new upgrades to their product line. Often we find issues on either end post upgrades.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I have a specific issue with the network interface connector, the NIC. We're limited to a maximum of two NICs in a virtualized environment. It's a limitation of the tool."
"The features that I like include LTM and Global Traffic Manager (GTM)."
"It's easy to use, and they have good support."
"The integration capabilities of the product are easy to use, and there is no complexity involved in it."
"The tool's investment is less than a physical device."
"It has DoS layer 7 protection, which not many vendors have."
"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers. If we didn't have Loadbalancer we would fail to set the end-user and it would cause a failure in the cluster."
"Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix."
"Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."
"For now, it's stable."
"It's pretty much a Swiss Army knife for managing all the load balancing techniques."
"Most important for us that it makes sure that the load is distributed and that we always have access to the end servers."
"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."
"The features I find valuable in this solution are the ease of managing the logs on the WAFs, the ease to identify break-in attempts into the network, the front-end firewall, and a more specific firewall."
 

Cons

"The tool has limitations with respect to code and RAM."
"BIG-IP could improve in supporting microservices, for example, in Docker and Kubernetes environments."
"On-the-go upgrades are an option that the tool currently lacks, making it an area where improvements are required."
"F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is a heavy system that needs a lot of CPU, memory, and hard disk."
"I have a specific issue with the network interface connector, the NIC. We're limited to a maximum of two NICs in a virtualized environment. It's a limitation of the tool."
"It's expensive and could be cheaper."
"The solution can be a bit pricey."
"Possibly a more graphical overview page (with colors) to give a two second overview to see if everything is working fine."
"We could enhance the security aspects of the load balancer."
"They're mostly designed to balance a particular type of traffic. I wanted to load balance DNS, and they just don't do it the way that we wanted to. So they're not used as DNS load balancers."
"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."
"I would like it if Loadbalancer had the ability to make rules for specific shared bots."
"It doesn't have the bonding capability feature."
"The configuration is somewhat complicated. Someone who does not know the solution may find this challenging."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"My company's customers need to make payments for the licensing charges attached to the product. It is an expensive product."
"I would rate the pricing a three out of ten, with ten being expensive."
"F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition is an expensive solution, but it's worth the price."
"The pricing is standard."
"It was easy to upgrade the license for unlimited clusters and servers. Pricing is fair."
"I think it’s very affordable."
"For now, it's stable."
"Loadbalancer.org is based on open-source products, but it requires money for support and other activities."
"These guys make their pricing scheme really easy.​"
"Licensing fees are paid annually."
"We've got an unlimited license, which doesn't costs that much compared to other vendors, and we don't have to buy it again."
"They're not the cheapest, not the most expensive, but I think value-wise, they're 100%."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
7%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise2
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise12
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition?
The integration capabilities of the product are easy to use, and there is no complexity involved in it.
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition?
I find it too complex to assess the impact of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition's automated deployment and integration with container orchestration platforms, such as Kubernetes and OpenShift, on my applic...
What advice do you have for others considering F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition?
I do not use the load balancing and traffic management features of F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. I use other container orchestration platforms, but they are not relevant to F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition. ...
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 do you like most about Loadbalancer.org?
Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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 Virtual Edition vs. LoadBalancer Enterprise and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.