We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Remote Access solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution is easy for administrators because you can check logs and write rules on the same page."
"The solution has been solid for me for over five years."
"The most important feature of Check Point Remote Access VPN is the multiple factor authentication."
"Check Point has been perfect for protecting us from any type of attack or data theft during remote management."
"It offers a simple configuration and setup."
"Access is browser-based only and requires no additional client installation."
"It is easy to install the Endpoint Remote Access VPN client on different platforms."
"I found the MEP feature the most valuable. This has improved users' latency allowing the users to connect to the nearest Azure Check Point VM."
"The F5 interface is easy to use."
"The detail that you have available when setting up iRules."
"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."
"We enjoy its overall ease of use."
"I have Big-IP change and control manager, which give me the roll back option. Therefore, I can view the last things which happened on the device."
"Bandwidth optimization and capacity awareness of the bandwidth are valuable features. Its video streaming capabilities are also very useful."
"It has so many features. First of all, it has a full proxy architecture, it has multiple modules. The best feature is the WAF, the web application firewall module. It also has cashing type capabilities. It has all kinds of load-balancing algorithms based on your IT requirements."
"F5 has many capabilities for load balancing and web application firewall features."
"Sometimes we have some small problems with Check Point Remote Access VPN. For example, problems with authentication."
"You have no ability to reserve a total number of licenses. The VPN user licenses are assigned per gateway, and if you enable MEP function is not so easy to size the gateway licenses."
"We have noted some stability issues."
"In the case of URL translation of the VPN Web portal, the requests made from the front end to the back end weren't valid (due to the use of dynamic subdomains). In the case of host translations, the request was made to the same host, however, we cannot specify the ports, which, in our case, are used to redirect to different servers."
"There is always room for innovation and the addition of new features."
"Bug Fixes and enhancement requests should be remediated earlier."
"Improved scalability would allow the solution to handle larger numbers of users and devices without a significant impact on performance."
"The maximum it is giving us is only 5 licenses and if you need more, they must be purchased separately."
"A lot of functions that are attributed to iRules can actually be simple profile changes. iRules do have a certain performance impact. Therefore, instead of writing simple iRules, they can create certain profiles for classes that will perform the same function."
"A more hybrid approach would be beneficial for users."
"LTM would be improved with the inclusion of signature-based blocking."
"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."
"Lacking in free training to help users understand the product more, so they would know how to correctly use it. Like other vendors and their products, becoming more proactive is an area for improvement."
"Technical support is somewhat slow and could be improved."
"Performance: Using the product, applications are jittery."
"Reporting could be improved and configuration made easier."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 5th in Remote Access with 62 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Reduces maintenance downtime and has a strong user community". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Fortinet FortiClient, Check Point Harmony Mobile and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our Check Point Remote Access VPN vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
We monitor all Remote Access 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.