F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs Loadbalancer.org comparison

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...

Read 23 Loadbalancer.org reviews

1,200 Views
1,192 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager and Loadbalancer.org are competitive in the load balancing solutions market. F5 BIG-IP LTM has the upper hand due to its advanced features, making it suitable for complex environments.

Features: F5 BIG-IP LTM provides comprehensive load balancing solutions, SSL offloading, iRules, and advanced traffic management functions. It is ideal for complex environments with unmatched hardware performance and strong integration capabilities. Loadbalancer.org focuses on simplicity with essential load balancing capabilities and an easy-to-use interface.

Room for Improvement: F5 BIG-IP LTM faces challenges with high pricing and a complex licensing model. Improvements in hardware support for low-end systems and configuration ease are needed. Loadbalancer.org requires enhancements in scalability and setup efficiency. Users suggest improvements in security features for better data protection.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: F5 BIG-IP LTM is flexible across multiple deployment environments but requires technical expertise for setup. Its customer service is generally strong but occasionally inconsistent. Loadbalancer.org offers easier deployment in on-premises settings and is praised for affordability and straightforward customer support, easing integration for various business sizes.

Pricing and ROI: F5 BIG-IP LTM is high-cost, justified by advanced features and performance, suitable for businesses needing comprehensive solutions. Its high ROI is offset by pricing hurdles for smaller businesses. Loadbalancer.org offers an affordable pricing model, delivering good value and presenting an attractive option for effective load balancing without complex configurations.

To learn more, read our detailed F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Loadbalancer.org Report (Updated: March 2025).

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Loadbalancer.org

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 839,422 peers since 2012

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

120

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Loadbalancer.org

Ranking in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)

12th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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 Loadbalancer.org is 3.4%, up from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)

Featured Reviews

Mahmoud-Yassin

Head of IT Infrastructure and Security Operations at United Arab Bank

You can fully automate disaster recovery

LTM's cloud capabilities could be improved. Cloud providers all offer load balancing, but you can't get the same level of security. F5's cloud service is still not on par with its on-prem service. F5 acquired multiple companies a few years ago, but they still haven't integrated those solutions. For example, F5 acquired Shape Security, which had an excellent solution for detecting bots and automated login attacks, but F5 offers the solution in an inflexible way. It is only available as a cloud-based solution. It isn't zone-based. Some companies are restricted from sending financial data outside the country because of GDPR in Europe or other national regulations. Here in the UAE, we can't send host data out.

Read full review

Roger Seelaender

UCaaS Engineering Manager at EarthLink

Great WAF - low-maintenance solution that performs as advertised

The solution can be improved with the development of a SIP engine because it is difficult to manage SBCs. All SBCs are really tough to write rules for. If we could put this in front of an SBC to have the right rules to possibly block the traffic, that would be very helpful. The solution can also improve the relationship between Loadbalancer.org and Metaswitch, or now, Microsoft because Metaswitch was purchased by Microsoft. They both position themselves as certified but don't always talk to each other. I wish there would be closer integration between the solution and the vendors when either release new upgrades to their product line. Often we find issues on either end post upgrades.

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

"The setup is pretty easy."

"The BIG-IP’s interface is more intuitive than other GUIs. It is well structured, not overloaded, and does not have too many gimmicks."

"What we like best about this solution is its stability. It is extremely stable."

"It integrates with AWS WAF, which makes it easy to deploy without changes to your infrastructure."

"I was able to simply and quickly set up the WAF rules and security, and also set up easily complex policies and rules which gave me some great features to redirect."

"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is very easy to use, from SSL Management to enabling, disabling loads, applications, systems, and monitoring. Overall the solution keeps our application functional from a client's perspective 24 hours a day, seven days a week."

"The solution is robust and reliable."

"The solution's stability is pretty good."

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

"Load balancing helps us distribute both incoming and outgoing data loads evenly among the servers, preventing overload on a single server."

"The connection that this solution helps our servers maintain has been most useful."

"It does what it’s supposed to do which is balancing an important intranet site we are using, so if one server dies, the second becomes active straight away."

"We now get notifications when pool members go down, and we eliminate our downtime by not sending traffic to downed pool members."

"The performance is good."

"It helps us to route the traffic to the available servers. If we didn't have Loadbalancer we would fail to set the end-user and it would cause a failure in the cluster."

"The support we have received from Loadbalancer.org has been good."

"We can more easily set up a test environment, because you can easily configure your forms. It makes it more flexible for us, to convert our test environment to a production environment, without having to change DNSs on the outside. You just configure the forms on the inside. So without changing the actual endpoint for the end user, we can create completely different networks in the background."

More Loadbalancer.org pros

Cons

"The license terms for "non-commercial" will be a challenge for us."

"It's a very expensive solution."

"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."

"The license terms for "non-commercial" will are challenging for us."

"The auto logout feature after three minutes is terrible. I wish they would make that longer, since it is not a feature that we can change."

"The web interface could be better."

"Its scalability and deployment should be better. It should be more scalable, and it should be easier to deploy."

"I would like them to expand load balancing, being able to go across multiple regions to on-premise and into the cloud. This could use improvement, as it is sometimes a little cumbersome."

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

"I'd like to see scalability improved; it can be costly."

"There are many features you can set in the backend of Loadbalancer. They should simplify the configuration. The administrator should be able to configure it more simply. How it is now, you can only configure it if you have a lot of experience."

"If I have to say something, I suppose they could add an automated configuration backup to an FTP location (or something similar) so you don’t have to manually do it. I don’t see this as a problem, of course, as the configuration rarely changes and we only need one backup, but maybe for other users that feature would be handy."

"Possibly a more graphical overview page (with colors) to give a two second overview to see if everything is working fine."

"We could enhance the security aspects of the load balancer."

"The solution can be a bit pricey."

"An area for improvement in Loadbalancer.org is that sometimes it works fine, but sometimes, it has issues. The setup for Loadbalancer.org is also complex, so that's another area for improvement."

"The automatic refresh of the System Overview webpage: It sometimes has an extra webpage reload (after a change) before you see it is executed. This can be confusing."

More Loadbalancer.org cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's fair, it's not too expensive. Maybe just a little 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."

"It could be priced a little less, especially on the virtual side. It gets a bit expensive, but you get what you pay."

"I would recommend that the cost be lowered."

"The solution is quite expensive if we compare it with the competition."

"The price of the solution is sometimes expensive."

"The tool is a bit expensive."

"It is sort of a commodity product. A load balancer is a load balancer. What will be, at the end of the day, the cheapest option or have the best performance, that is what it will come down to."

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

"It filled a requirement for our project, and it did so at lesser cost than their competitors."

"Licensing fees are paid annually."

"I think it’s very affordable."

"The solution requires an annual support license of $2,780 for four systems or $695 a year per unit for support not including the units."

"The costs associated with Loadbalancer.org depends on the technology. For some, we need to pay, but others are open, so they're free."

"It is inexpensive, and even their “unlimited” version, the VA MAX is still far cheaper than competitors."

"They're not the cheapest, not the most expensive, but I think value-wise, they're 100%."

"Loadbalancer.org is based on open-source products, but it requires money for support and other activities."

More Loadbalancer.org pricing and cost advice

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

839,422 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%

Government

University

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.

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

The solution is robust and reliable.

Do you recommend Loadbalancer.org?

Since Loadbalancer.org is an open-source solution, I would recommend this solution for smaller businesses that don’t have major scaling requirements and don’t have the budget for a commercial solut...

What do you like most about Loadbalancer.org?

Existing customers are trying to migrate from the physical F5 load balancer to the AVI load balancer because it is scalable and easily managed.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Loadbalancer.org?

Pricing of Loadbalancer.org is something to consider.

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

Comparisons

Compared 20% of the time

NetScaler 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 8% of the time

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

Compared 8% of the time

Peplink SpeedFusion vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

Compared 2% of the time

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

NetScaler vs Loadbalancer.org

Compared 23% of the time

HAProxy vs Loadbalancer.org

Compared 21% of the time

Fortinet FortiADC vs Loadbalancer.org

Compared 14% of the time

Kemp LoadMaster vs Loadbalancer.org

Compared 11% of the time

A10 Networks Thunder ADC vs Loadbalancer.org

Compared 6% of the time

More Loadbalancer.org Competitors

Product Reports

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

March 2025

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report

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

Download Loadbalancer.org product report

February 2025

Also Known As

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

No data available

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.

Loadbalancer.org is a versatile solution that offers load balancing for small businesses, multiple instances of applications, web application firewall, publishing Windows and SQL applications, and security for telephone service systems. It is easy to use, cost-effective, and performs well with low latency.

The connection maintenance and security features are valuable, including managing logs on WAFs, identifying break-in attempts writing rules to block them and using HAProxy to control what is allowed. Loadbalancer.org has helped organizations reduce the impact of connection issues, provide security, and ensure no downtime or impact on productivity.

Top Industries that use Loadbalancer.org:

Healthcare: Loadbalancer.org is widely considered the top load balancer provider in the healthcare IT industry. Loadbalancer.org sees that healthcare IT personnel can ensure their organizations are moving seamlessly toward interoperability and are able to easily scale to meet today’s continually growing data demands with no compromise in performance.

Storage solutions: Loadbalancer.org has significant offerings and partnerships with object-based storage providers to ensure they are always ready for today's ever-changing dynamic storage needs. The comprehensive integration offers high-performance scalable solutions which can provide always available next-gen storage solutions.

Security: Loadbalancer.org solutions provide an extra layer of security to protect against the latest risk and threats. Loadbalancer.org will provide a close integration to ensure the organization is always secure.

Print: Loadbalancer.org can work with organizations to ensure their print environments keep working smoothly and is the only organization that fully supports Microsoft Print load balancing. Loadbalancer.org minimizes the complexities of print environments to ensure that all systems are consistently available.

Loadbalancer.org is certified as an OEM provider for all of Microsoft's most popular key applications and solutions. Loadbalancer.org has created and developed streamlined deployments to facilitate improved scalability, performance, and uptime. They offer a tailored GUI to make every process super easy. Loadbalancer.org offers several flexible licensing plans to ensure cost-effectiveness, improved margins, revenue opportunities, and optimized TCO. The numerous robust solutions Loadbalancer.org offers can ensure that any enterprise organization is able to satisfy the growing demands of today’s dynamic marketplace while maintaining an excellent user experience.

Reviews from Real Users

“Loadbalancer.org is less complex than Citrix. In some cases, our customers do not have an engineer on staff who can support this device. These customers have a large number of Linux engineers but don't have the money. We suggested using Loadbalancer.org and other open-source tools. Many customers are of different sizes and have different budgets. Loadbalancer.org has everything that is needed.” - Artem M., System Engineer at CROC

“We use Loadbalancer for balancing loads in our main application. Loadbalancer is easy to use. It performs well, with low latency.” - Walid M., Network and Security Engineer at a logistics company

Sample Customers

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

Vodafone, NASA, Mercedes, NBC, Siemens, AT&T, Barclays, Zurich, Penn State University, Fiserv, Canon, Toyota, University of Cambridge, US Army, US Navy, Ocean Spray, ASOS, Pfizer, BBC, Bacardi, Monsoon, River Island, U.S Air Force, King's College London, NHS, Ricoh, Philips, Santander, TATA Communications, Ericcson, Ross Video, Evertz, TalkTalk TV, Giacom, Rapid Host.