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

F5 and Ivanti are both solutions in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category. F5 is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.5, while Ivanti is ranked #17. F5 holds a 15.1% mindshare in ADC, compared to Ivanti’s 0.5% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of F5 users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Ivanti users who would recommend it.

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...

Read 120 F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) reviews

7,898 Views
6,521 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Ivanti Virtual Web Applicat...

301 Views
235 Comparison Views

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...

Ivanti Virtual Web Applicat...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about NetScaler, F5, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC).

To learn more, read our detailed Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,168 peers since 2012

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

120

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Ivanti Virtual Web Applicat...

Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)

17th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Web Application Firewall (WAF) (43rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is 15.1%, down from 16.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall is 0.5%, down from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)

Featured Reviews

Richard Polyak

Sr. Architect at NBC Universal

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.

Read full review

reviewer890211

Consultant at a consultancy

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like that F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is a product that comes with valuable features, but what stands out from all features is load balancing."

"iRules are very valuable. In addition to that, the way profiles are depicted by the LTM is also very good."

"The main reason that we suggest this product to our clients is the great integration with other security tools, such as IBM Guardium."

"It offers features Kemp doesn't provide. For example, there are predefined templates for handling Office 365. You can download them for automatic configuration."

"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."

"I think F5's tech support may be better than Citrix's because they mainly focus on the ADC product, but Citrix support covers Hypervisor, XenMobile, FAS, and ADC. And from my experience, sometimes, we face some issues that Citrix cannot handle."

"Where we are finding the AWS version helpful is when we are trying to scale up new environments. AWS Marketplace helps here a lot."

"It has made it a single entry point for all users, verging across all the VPCs. It is more of an SSO solution versus multitier user loggin."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) pros

"The most valuable aspect of this solution is that it is simple to deploy. The deployment took us ten minutes."

Cons

"LTM would be improved with the inclusion of signature-based blocking."

"Security enhancement should be more user friendly."

"They need to improve the interface and some of the functionalities."

"I used GitHub for autoscaling CloudFormation, and I found two bugs and I submitted them. Their implementation in GitHub could be cleaner and allow for a bit more customization."

"I think the logging could be improved."

"Cloud native integration should be provided."

"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."

"I would like to see F-5 implement a regular routing like in other Linux-based devices. When we try and integrate in some complex networks, we have to use some additional routing scenarios from a Layer 3 perspective, then we have some problems. It would be great if this were fixed somehow."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) cons

"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

"BIG-IP LTM is considered a premium product, so it's quite expensive and isn't affordable for all customers."

"Great product for the money. But they can get really expensive, so get what meets your needs."

"It is cheaper than the average on the market."

"The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition."

"If you are planning to use security features, better to go for strong hardware and the best bundle license, which is great for web security."

"The licensing model of F5 BIG-IP LTM is highly complex. The operation cost of the solution is high. The overall cost is high."

"The cost that they have with AWS are almost prohibitive. I'm being forced to use F5 WAF. I would not simply use it based on cost. I agree that they have some great features, but for me, cost is key in terms of AWS."

"Try to negotiate all the software features that you require upfront."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) pricing and cost advice

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

824,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

14%

Government

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

19%

Financial Services Firm

16%

Energy/Utilities Company

Government

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What do you like most about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)?

The solution is robust and reliable.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

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

Compared 18% of the time

NetScaler vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

Compared 12% of the time

Microsoft Azure Application Gateway vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

Compared 8% of the time

VMWare Avi Load Balancer vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

Compared 7% of the time

HAProxy vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

Compared 6% of the time

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Competitors

VMWare Avi Load Balancer vs Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall

Compared 52% of the time

More Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

December 2024

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report

Download F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)

December 2024

Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall report

Download Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall product report

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

Learn More

Ivanti

Overview

F5 BIG-IP LTM optimizes the speed and reliability of your apps via both network and application layers. Using real-time protocol and traffic management decisions based on app and server and connection management conditions, and TCP and content offloading, BIG-IP LTM dramatically improves application and infrastructure responsiveness. BIG-IP LTM's architecture includes protocol awareness to control traffic for the most important applications. BIG-IP LTM tracks the dynamic performance levels of servers and delivers SSL performance and visibility for inbound and outbound traffic, to protect the user experience by encrypting everything from the client to the server.

BIG-IP LTM provides enterprise-class Application Delivery Controller (ADC). You get granular layer 7 control, SSL offloading and acceleration capabilities, and advanced scaling technologies that deliver performance and reliability on-demand. The highly optimized TCP/IP stack combines TCP/IP techniques and improvements in the latest RFCs with extensions to minimize the effect of congestion and packet loss and recovery. Independent testing tools and customer experiences show LTM's TCP stack delivers up to a 2x performance gain for users and a 4x increase in bandwidth efficiency.

Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall delivers scalable application security for off-the-shelf and custom applications, including third-party frameworks. Apply business rules to online traffic, inspect and block attacks such as SQL injection and cross-site scripting (XSS), and filter outgoing traffic and data to mask credit card data. Ivanti Virtual Web Application Firewall helps achieve compliance with PCI-DSS requirements.

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.

Gilt Groupe

Buyer's Guide

Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)

December 2024

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about NetScaler, F5, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.

We monitor all Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) 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.