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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs Fortinet FortiADC comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
120
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Fortinet FortiADC
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 15.0%, down from 16.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortinet FortiADC is 9.6%, up from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Richard Polyak - PeerSpot reviewer
Reduces maintenance downtime and has a strong user community
The advice I would give to others who are looking to implement F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is this: look at their user knowledge base first to see if the solution truly fits what you need. On a scale of one to 10, I would give F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager a nine.
Sameer Ghewade - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and scalable solution that is easy to operate and has single-handed control
Fortinet's fixed application version has very good policies. Some features have been reduced in the new version of Fortinet FortiADC. Whenever Fortinet updates its application version, it should provide the same features. For example, I was using MAC-based control for end users. Six months back, I updated the version of Fortinet OS. The MAC-based control on the new version was CLI-based, which is difficult to manage. I wanted the MAC-based control to be GUI-based. Fortinet FortiADC should include an advanced-level SD-WAN.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The main reason that we suggest this product to our clients is the great integration with other security tools, such as IBM Guardium."
"Tech support has been very quick to respond to all of the needs that we've had. If you want ad-hoc support. They also provide professional services that you can purchase as well."
"Currently, it's distributing the load perfectly, as per my understanding of our requirements."
"It is a fast and available solution."
"It integrates with AWS WAF, which makes it easy to deploy without changes to your infrastructure."
"The setup is pretty easy."
"It is a very good, flexible solution. It helps us to catch up on flaws in our partner solutions on top of its load balancing feature."
"It is stable."
"The product has flexible and interesting licensing options."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"Content caching and content compression are good features."
"TSL and SSL offloading are both very good features."
"I am impressed with the product's load-balancing feature."
"Simple to use and easy to integrate."
"Key features include SSL Offloading, VM availability, and L7 load balancing."
"The solution enhances performance by efficiently balancing the load across multiple backend servers."
 

Cons

"We would like to have integration into encryption and PKI integration with SafeNet. That is probably the key component in using External PKIs, letting people bring their PKIs with them."
"The initial setup can be complex - it's quite flexible in terms of configuration, but the person configuring it needs to understand the application side, the network side, and the server."
"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."
"I would like to see improvement in the manageability and easier setup."
"Not everything is intuitive."
"The deployment can take some time because you can do a lot of configuring to meet the needs of the use cases for clients."
"They need to develop the reporting tools further."
"The user experience for dashboards and reports can be improved. They should make dashboards and the reporting system easier for users. They need to add more reports to the dashboard. Currently, for complicated reports, I have to do the customization. It should have more integration with network firewalls to be able to gather all the information required for traffic management."
"The user interface could be more friendly and CLI could be more like that of Fortigate."
"The configuration is relatively complex."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"The L7 Persistent load-balancing algorithm has not worked for me after having tested it many times with my customer's in-house application. I'd like to suggest that the company make sure that all load-balancing algorithms work properly with most applications, even those that are in-house apps."
"I had a terrible experience with Fortinet support. I only used support once when I bought the solution. I got no response for two days. However, I believe that it's no longer the case. Fortinet solutions have problems when they're launched. For example, we had issues with Fortinet's authenticator when it came out. We also had trouble with FortiNAC in the beginning."
"Fortinet has some drawbacks, and it can be a bit challenging to scale."
"The solution needs to integrate sFlow. sFlow provides better visualization of the bandwidth and types of traffic passing through the device. When used in the traffic path, this information can be really useful."
"Because it is so generic, the documentation requires special attention. A person who has not worked on Fortinet FortiADC or a similar product will struggle to understand what the document is trying to say. The documentation could be more specific, and more detailed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Unless the price difference is large, this is not the primary concern for the product. The performance and product-related issues (secure for VPN, multi-function for network device, etc.) are the keys."
"It could be priced a little less, especially on the virtual side. It gets a bit expensive, but you get what you pay."
"Try to negotiate all the software features that you require upfront."
"When we purchased additional licenses for our other locations, we received a discount of between 20% and 25%."
"The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition."
"Great product for the money. But they can get really expensive, so get what meets your needs."
"Purchasing through the AWS Marketplace was very simple. The main reason that we went this way was the simplicity of buying it there. It is maintained and upgraded for us, and this makes it easy to stay current."
"The solution is quite expensive if we compare it with the competition."
"I believe the price is good. It's fair. There are no extra costs."
"Compared to F5, FortiADC pricing is better."
"I rate Fortinet FortiADC's pricing one out of ten. It is fixed."
"The solution's pricing is an issue and should be improved."
"The product has affordable pricing."
"The solution is less expensive than F5 or Imperva and is the most reasonably priced option available."
"Our basic license excludes features such as antivirus and IDS. Due to license limitations, some functionalities are not configured."
"The product has average pricing. I rate its pricing a five out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
816,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Government
9%
Educational Organization
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP?
There are no specific areas for improvement as it is already well-resolved and doesn't require further enhancements.
What is your primary use case for F5 BIG-IP?
The primary use case includes load balancing to serve application servers and basic web application firewall solutions. Our customers use it for that purpose.
Is Citrix ADC (formerly Netscaler) the best ADC to use and if not why?
For ADC, any ADC can do a good job. But in case if you want to add WAF functionality to the same ADC hardware you have to look for other ADC's like F5, Imperva, Radware, Fortinet, etc.
Do you recommend Fortinet FortiADC?
I recommend Fortinet FortiADC. My experience with Fortinet has been very positive. Our company has been using it for around five years. We mainly use FortiADC for the load balancing of application ...
What do you like most about Fortinet FortiADC?
The user interface is very easy and integrates with Sandbox easily.
 

Also Known As

F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
FortiADC Application Delivery Controller, FortiADC
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Black Gold Regional Schools, Amadeus Hospitality, Jefferson County, Chunghwa Telecom, City of Boroondara, Dimension Data
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Fortinet FortiADC and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.