We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IQ and ServiceNow Orchestration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The best aspect of the solution is that we can have everything integrated with a rather large capacity in order to personalize and configure specific rules."
"The GUI is fine, at least from an engineer's perspective."
"The backup, monitoring and logging are the best features."
"The most valuable features are load balancing and WAF."
"The reporting feature is quite good."
"Features like AFM, the gateway, and Global DNS are the coolest features that save work for us."
"Scalability: To move from larger boxes to smaller boxes, along with virtualization. So, we are not locked into a particular size."
"F5 BIG-IQ has always provided us with great support."
"Great with IT processes and business processes."
"The iTerm suite is also crucial for visibility and optimization."
"The product has a flexible interface for development."
"The solution effectively automates business processes."
"It's probably the best product out there."
"The data visualization is good."
"There are a lot of ready to use orchestration custom packs."
"Employee onboarding, de-boarding, and other service-provision features make the process easier and it saves us a lot of time."
"F5 BIG-IQ is a complex solution, and it cannot manage everything related to BIG-IPs."
"The solution should improve pricing. It's expensive in comparison to other American solutions."
"Sometimes the solution does not work."
"They could use YAML or JSON if they wanted to make it a little bit easier for us."
"Integration with VAS is something that they need to work on."
"F5 BIG-IQ should improve by being a complete certificate management solution because currently, it is only for Venafi. Other automation platforms, should be added."
"There are a lot of scripts available on the internet for people who know how to use them, but with a graphical interface, it would be easier for new users."
"I had trouble with high availability deployment in my environment."
"The deployment requires awareness among the project staff."
"We cannot perform GUI automation using the tool."
"There should be connectors to cover at least the top industry applications, and they should be easier to configure in a plug-and-play fashion."
"ServiceNow Orchestration needs to improve multiple aspects in which their event monitoring system is one. The solution lacks event monitoring systems which makes them non-competitive. They need to include improvements in a similar manner that they did in Sweden."
"Efficiency of some features could be improved."
"The flow rate for releases and updates is very, very slow and does not meet customers' objectives for scalability."
"There can be gaps in integration."
"The automatic remediation needs enhancement, particularly integrating ServiceNow with tools like SolarWinds and Logic Monitor. It is functional, but it needs improvement."
F5 BIG-IQ is ranked 22nd in Process Automation with 12 reviews while ServiceNow Orchestration is ranked 13th in Process Automation with 12 reviews. F5 BIG-IQ is rated 7.4, while ServiceNow Orchestration is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IQ writes "A central management system to manage and monitor a bunch of different BIG-IP devices". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Orchestration writes "Fastest upgrading technology in the market currently". F5 BIG-IQ is most compared with , whereas ServiceNow Orchestration is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Control-M, Nintex Process Platform and Microsoft System Center Orchestrator. See our F5 BIG-IQ vs. ServiceNow Orchestration report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process Automation 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.