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

Barracuda Load Balancer ADC vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

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

Barracuda Load Balancer ADC
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
14th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of Barracuda Load Balancer ADC is 3.0%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 12.6%, down from 15.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)12.6%
Barracuda Load Balancer ADC3.0%
Other84.4%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Moges Bekru - PeerSpot reviewer
Network and Security Engineer at Malam Engineering PLC
Balances loads efficiently and saves costs but could improve initial setup
The typical use case for Barracuda Load Balancer ADC involves managing and distributing network traffic efficiently to maintain system performance. Clients use Barracuda Load Balancer ADC for its ability to handle and balance loads across servers I have seen improvements in Barracuda Load…
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup was straightforward and deployment took one day."
"The price is very good, and it's not very expensive."
"I would rate the stability of Barracuda Load Balancer as a ten out of ten; it has high stability."
"The solution is simple and powerful. I find the Barracuda Load Balancer ADC's load balancing function most valuable. It balances the traffic well. The security features, like the Web Application Firewall, are also very helpful."
"The most useful features in Barracuda Load Balancer are its security capabilities, load balancing efficiency, and scalability."
"The Barracuda solution has improved the way we function by consolidating threat management and network optimization in one standalone appliance."
"Barracuda's technical support is good - whenever we have an issue, they immediately connect and resolve it."
"The initial setup is easy."
"Great load balancing."
"It supports APIs and virtual additions for cloud and VMware."
"The most valuable feature is the proxy."
"Be sure of what you will use; F5 isn’t cheap but is worth the price."
"Our experience has been very good, in terms of performance, and securing our application infrastructure."
"Technical support and documentation are excellent."
"This solution is the best security platform."
 

Cons

"Load Balancer ADC is competitively priced, but it's not feature-rich, and its technology is not that advanced."
"The Barracuda Load Balancer ADC could be improved with more customization features. For example, F5 uses iRules for custom configurations. I haven't found something similar in Barracuda yet. The load balancer and WAF's basic and common features are enough, but we need more customization options."
"There are areas of Barracuda Load Balancer's security that have room for improvement, particularly concerning handling traffic."
"We find with WAN optimization it’s a bit unstable but we don't use it for that."
"The quality of the solution's performance could be improved."
"Currently, the product offers everything we need. I can't recall any features that may be lacking."
"The pricing model has caused some frustration. My clients implemented the solution and later wanted to upgrade the features but the pricing structure was complicated. There are other solutions with better pricing models."
"F5 BIG-IP LTM can improve on the SSL loading which includes the authentication of certificates. Although, most of these issues have been solved there are still some issue that persists."
"F5 should improve or develop the reporting tools further."
"F5 has another solution to load balance servers on the cloud, which they got after the purchase of NGINX. It is deployed as Kubernetes or something like that, but the problem now is that they have two solutions for two situations. They should make F5 deployable on the cloud."
"In terms of pricing, it could be more competitive."
"The user experience for dashboards and reports can be improved."
"Lacking in free training to help users understand the product more, so they would know how to correctly use it. Like other vendors and their products, becoming more proactive is an area for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the solution's pricing a five out of ten."
"Load Balancer ADC is cost-effective and is about half the price of F5."
"Security should be involved in any base license. When you bring on F5, you only have default license. Then, the ASM product license has to be purchased. It would be great if F5 could include the ASM in the base license."
"Try to negotiate all the software features that you require upfront."
"The price is little bit on higher side compared to the cost of NGINX."
"Our company pays for the licensing cost on a yearly basis. Also, there are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"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."
"F5 is expensive."
"Great product for the money. But they can get really expensive, so get what meets your needs."
"They are expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
900,228 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Media Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Barracuda Load Balancer ADC?
Pricing for Barracuda Load Balancer ADC can be a consideration. However, it offers good value with its cost-saving benefits and efficient operation, balancing the initial financial outlay.
What needs improvement with Barracuda Load Balancer ADC?
There are areas of Barracuda Load Balancer's security that have room for improvement, particularly concerning handling traffic. Also, more could be done to enhance the initial setup, as it can be c...
What is your primary use case for Barracuda Load Balancer ADC?
The typical use case for Barracuda Load Balancer ADC involves managing and distributing network traffic efficiently to maintain system performance. Clients use Barracuda Load Balancer ADC for its a...
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...
 

Also Known As

Barracuda Load Balancer
F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Fenwal Blood Technologies
Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about Barracuda Load Balancer ADC vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,228 professionals have used our research since 2012.