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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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 Local Traffic Man...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
121
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ivanti Virtual Web Applicat...
Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
16th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Web Application Firewall (WAF) (43rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 15.7%, up from 15.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall is 0.4%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
 

Featured Reviews

Bonieber  Orofeo - PeerSpot reviewer
Identifying compromised traffic and securing data has been a significant advantage
One of the most beneficial features of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) ( /products/f5-big-ip-local-traffic-manager-ltm-reviews ) is its ability to identify compromised traffic and its capabilities in authentication. Additionally, the security aspect of it provides a significant advantage as it helps us secure our data, which is a major investment and benefit for us. Before using this system, we had difficulties in storing our data and managing the traffic that comes in and out.
reviewer890211 - PeerSpot reviewer
Good feature set and is simple to deploy
In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else. We sort of stopped deploying them because of that. There are additional costs to the standard licensing. There are bandwidth prices. The feature set is quite good. We've been told to stop using them because of the price. If they can do something to address that I believe it would be better. On the latest version they've got a community edition, which is quite a good bandwidth, but in essence, it's to address the entry-level price. When you get to 10 gig bandwidth, it's way too expensive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We're able to do load balancing and global load balancing. When you marry those two products together, you can do a lot more. We're able to deliver our applications more securely and faster. It has improved our deliverability where we have more service across the shared data centers. We can intelligently reach all of those client connections across all of the servers and do it fairly quickly. It has helped improve our application delivery and performance."
"It helps us recognize sessions from certain IPs that are authorized to manage the application. This is a function we haven't found anywhere else."
"Routing and load balancing are its most valuable features."
"The product is very stable. We put a decent amount of stress on it given our load."
"The configuration and integration into the AWS environment was pretty easy."
"Its user interface is very easy to use on a day-to-day basis. It is very user-friendly."
"The BIG-IP’s interface is more intuitive than other GUIs. It is well structured, not overloaded, and does not have too many gimmicks."
"F5 BIG-IP is used with good applications and functions as an application firewall with additional features. We will not use any feature or any service unless there is a business case and there is a need for implementation."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is simple to deploy. The deployment took us ten minutes."
 

Cons

"There is a challenge in Pakistan. This is when there is a hardware failure. Sometimes, it takes more time to get a replacement because it is sent out from the U.S. or some other regional outpost. Thus, it takes two to three days to receive a replacement."
"This is a very expensive solution."
"Internet and cloud support could be improved."
"Technical support could be improved."
"In the LTM solution, it would be beneficial to have more algorithms for traffic segmentation or the ability to create user-defined algorithms rather than being restricted to predefined ones."
"My only point of contention would be that it is a little pricey."
"A more hybrid approach would be beneficial for users."
"The pricing could always be better. It's a bit expensive."
"In terms of what needs improvement, the price could be lowered. We've tried to deploy more of them but our purchasing department has said that they're way too expensive and they would prefer to use something else."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition."
"F5 is expensive."
"BIG-IP LTM is considered a premium product, so it's quite expensive and isn't affordable for all customers."
"You can buy it on a yearly basis, or you can go for a subscription. For on-premise boxes, it is just the RMA."
"The price of F5 BIG-IP LTM could improve."
"The price of the solution is sometimes expensive."
"We purchased through the AWS Marketplace because it was a popular way to go, and we were intrigued. The price of this product is not an issue. They have good pricing and licensing."
"It's fair, it's not too expensive. Maybe just a little high."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
842,690 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Healthcare Company
7%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
Pulse vWAF, Pulse Virtual Traffic Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Gilt Groupe
Find out what your peers are saying about NetScaler, F5, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: March 2025.
842,690 professionals have used our research since 2012.