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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.6
Many companies found F5 BIG-IP LTM beneficial for security and deployment, with mixed views on ROI depending on pricing.
Sentiment score
7.2
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange offers high ROI, enhancing security and productivity, reducing costs, and improving remote user experience significantly.
The major return on investment is the security of our data.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
When I see that I am trying to cut costs, for example, even when replacing Prisma, we have managed to save about over half a million dollars a year.
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
In terms of time savings, since users no longer manually connect to the VPN, access became seamless, improving user productivity, especially for remote users.
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
We don't have to purchase many components such as load balancers and proxy servers that were necessary in traditional setups.
Lead Engineer at FIS Global
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
F5 BIG-IP LTM support experiences vary, with mixed reviews on responsiveness, knowledge, community resources, and regional support efficacy.
Sentiment score
4.9
Zscaler's customer service is professional and knowledgeable, but complex issues can cause delays, affecting global user ratings.
I would rate the technical support of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) nine out of ten.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
Overall, my experience with F5 is very good compared to Radware.
Project Manager at IBM
Customer support is quite good but could be faster.
Network Engineer at Stryker
The support engineers are technically knowledgeable, particularly for Zscaler Private Access related issues, providing clear guidance and documentation for troubleshooting.
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Sometimes, support takes time since the solution has some bugs that need fixing.
architect at Tata Consultancy
They have provided the numbers and contact supports, and it is almost immediate.
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
F5 BIG-IP LTM offers scalable integration with AWS, suitable for enterprises, but requires careful sizing to avoid constraints.
Sentiment score
7.7
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform's cloud-native architecture enables scalable, efficient, and seamless expansion for diverse enterprises with minimal hardware changes.
The only limitation I was mentioning is that it was unable to identify the sources of vulnerability, which they are going to embed by the mid of this year.
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is highly scalable, primarily because it is built on a cloud-native, globally distributed architecture.
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
F5 BIG-IP LTM is stable and reliable, with occasional bugs manageable through updates, supported by responsive customer service.
Sentiment score
7.8
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform offers high reliability and availability with minimal downtime, ensuring effective performance for enterprises.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is very stable, especially in enterprise environments.
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is very stable.
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
 

Room For Improvement

F5 BIG-IP LTM needs better cost-effectiveness, user interface, cloud integration, documentation, security, automation, and a flexible licensing model.
Zscaler's Zero Trust Platform faces cost, latency, and control issues, with users seeking better integration, support, and scalability.
I expect faster resolutions when providing contact numbers while raising cases, as other companies typically do.
Network Engineer at Stryker
The pricing of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is on the higher side compared to competitors, but it is worth it.
Project Manager at IBM
It would be beneficial to have more granular centralized visibility, allowing for quick end-to-end tracing of a user request from authentication to application access without switching between multiple views.
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform probably needs to be more efficient because scanning takes a lot of time.
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
They might be able to identify if something is missing with Zscaler.
architect at Tata Consultancy
 

Setup Cost

F5 BIG-IP LTM is feature-rich but costly, especially in AWS; consult F5 for tailored licensing options.
Zscaler Zero Trust pricing varies, with flexible customization options and potential savings offsetting initial high costs for larger organizations.
There is minimal setup cost since it is a cloud-delivered platform, eliminating the need to invest in additional hardware such as VPN gateways or maintain infrastructure.
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform is much, much cheaper when comparing price.
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
 

Valuable Features

F5 BIG-IP LTM excels in load balancing, security, and customization, enhancing performance and reliability for complex network environments.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform enhances security and user experience with seamless connectivity, scalability, and robust control features.
The impact of SSL offloading on reducing server load and latency is very much positive because whatever traffic we receive, we encrypt at our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) level, which has definitely reduced the additional load and SSL decryption load on the servers, so it has very much helped us and it is very smooth; it will not take much time and will not impact our regular traffic.
Project Manager at IBM
R-series has better CPU and memory, leading to higher throughput with minimal downtime, making it a significant improvement over the I-series.
Network Engineer at Stryker
One of the most beneficial features of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is its ability to identify compromised traffic and its capabilities in authentication.
IT Manager at Chong Hua Hospital
The solution is cloud-based with the latest inspection engines, which I find to be amazing.
architect at Tata Consultancy
We have excellent account management, smooth marketplace engagement, and processing in how my team or organization uses Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform.
Manager, Software Development at a outsourcing company with 201-500 employees
Since we started using Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, it has auto-configuration, and wherever we have deployed the auto-configuration, we have not encountered any problem.
Cybersecurity Senior Program Manager at Dayforce
 

Categories and Ranking

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (1st)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange...
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
67
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (6th), Cloud Access Security Brokers (CASB) (9th), Application Control (6th), ZTNA as a Service (1st), Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) (4th), Remote Browser Isolation (RBI) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is designed for Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) and holds a mindshare of 14.3%, down 15.6% compared to last year.
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, on the other hand, focuses on Secure Access Service Edge (SASE), holds 9.5% mindshare, down 11.7% since last year.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)14.3%
NetScaler12.7%
Fortinet FortiADC9.7%
Other63.3%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform9.5%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks11.8%
Cato SASE Cloud Platform9.8%
Other68.9%
Secure Access Service Edge (SASE)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Vibin Thomas - PeerSpot reviewer
Team Lead, Technical Content Security at Valuepoint Systems
Zero trust access has transformed remote connectivity and now simplifies secure app usage
Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange Platform, especially Zscaler Private Access, is very strong, though there are a few areas where improvements can be made. One challenge observed is around initial troubleshooting and visibility. While Zscaler Private Access provides logs, it can sometimes take time to pinpoint the exact cause of access issues, especially in complex environments with multiple policies and identity integration. Another area is the dependency on identity and connector health. Since Zscaler Private Access is heavily reliant on app connectors and identity providers, any issues with these components can impact user access, making proper monitoring critical. During the initial setup, policy configuration and application onboarding require careful planning, especially for larger environments with many applications. These challenges are manageable with proper design and monitoring. Overall, the platform delivers strong security and user experience. I would recommend a few improvements, especially around user interface, reporting, and troubleshooting experience. From a user interface perspective, while the platform is powerful, the policy configuration and navigation can feel complex, especially for new users. A more simplified and intuitive layout for policy mapping and application access would help reduce the learning curve. In terms of reporting, Zscaler Private Access provides logs, but having more built-in customizable dashboards and analytics would be very helpful. Better visibility into user access patterns, application performance, and real-time troubleshooting insights would improve operational efficiency. From a support and troubleshooting standpoint, it would be beneficial to have more granular centralized visibility, allowing for quick end-to-end tracing of a user request from authentication to application access without switching between multiple views. These improvements would make the platform even more efficient, especially for large-scale enterprise environments.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business62
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise86
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise43
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What is the better solution - Prisma Access or Zscaler Private Access?
We looked into Prisma Access before choosing Zscaler Private Access (ZPA). Palo Alto’s Prisma Access is a secure access service edge (SASE) designed to deliver network security in a cloud-deliver...
What do you like most about Zscaler SASE?
The most valuable features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability.
What needs improvement with Zscaler SASE?
The solution needs to improve a lot of aspects.
 

Also Known As

F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
Zscaler SASE, Zscaler DLP, Zscaler CASB, Zscaler CSPM, Zscaler Browser Isolation, Zscaler Posture Control
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Siemens, AutoNation, GE, NOV
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, NetScaler, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: March 2026.
885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.