We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Checkmarx pinpoints the vulnerability in the code and also presents the flow of malicious input across the application."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"The SAST component was absolutely 100% stable."
"The product's most valuable feature is static code and supply chain effect analysis. It provides a lot of visibility."
"Most valuable features include: ease of use, dashboard. interface and the ability to report."
"The setup is fairly easy. We didn't struggle with the process at all."
"It gives the proper code flow of vulnerabilities and the number of occurrences."
"From my point of view, it is the best product on the market."
"It is a fast and available solution."
"Good application firewall."
"F5 Big-IP Local Traffic Manager has better modular features especially LTM, which according to the clients, is very beneficial. 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."
"If I were to choose one key feature in particular, perhaps it would be the iRule feature. It’s a really versatile tool."
"The iRule feature is very useful for inspecting HTTP. Sometimes, we use it for modifying the headers of the HTTP."
"It is a scalable solution."
"It provides first-tier firewalling, for you application. And it provides server load-balancing, it provides optimization, and it provides a proxy feature, where your users cannot directly access your server. It acts as a fully proxy architecture. It has client-side and server-side connections, both, and they're separate."
"It is an easy way to build application policies (graphical)."
"The pricing can get a bit expensive, depending on the company's size."
"The statistics module has a function that allows you to show some statistics, but I think it's limited. Maybe it needs more information."
"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"We have received some feedback from our customers who are receiving a large number of false positives."
"It would be really helpful if the level of confidence was included, with respect to identified issues."
"When we first ran it on a big project, there wasn't enough memory on the computer. It originally ran with eight gigabytes, and now it runs with 32. The software stopped at some point, and while I don't think it said it ran out of memory, it just said "stopped" and something else. We had to go to the logs and send them to the integrator, and eventually, they found a memory issue in the logs and recommended increasing the memory. We doubled it once, and it didn't seem enough. We doubled it again, and it helped."
"Creating and editing custom rules in Checkmarx is difficult because the license for the editor comes at an additional cost, and there is a steep learning curve."
"I think the logging could be improved."
"Internet and cloud support could be improved."
"Its scalability and deployment should be better. It should be more scalable, and it should be easier to deploy."
"The deployment could be simplified."
"In terms of pricing, it could be more competitive."
"Right now, there are a lot of products within F5's portfolio. They acquired a couple of companies like NGINX and Volterra. Some features and technologies overlapped when this acquisition occurred. They need to refine it and come up with a single, proper solution. F5 should focus more on zero trust network access (ZTNA).They should be more focused on that framework because the industry is moving towards that. Everyone is talking about SASE and zero trust."
"There are issues with F5 BIG-IP but they are minor issues not affecting production and services. Sometimes the operations and the facility systems fail. However, there is an alert action from the windows. An ordeal for the manager."
"An expensive solution for the minimal features we use."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Reduces maintenance downtime and has a strong user community". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our Checkmarx One vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
