We performed a comparison between Avi Networks Software Load Balancer and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its visibility and login mechanism are the best parts. In addition to the great visibility it has a great dashboard and an easy to configure graphic user interface, a beautiful GUI."
"What's most valuable in Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is its deployment capability, the ability to deploy in a dispersed service, with the service engines that can disperse and have a single control plane that can control the load balancing services across any available platform, wherever needed. The analytics of Avi Networks Software Load Balancer and flexibility of deployment are its most valuable features and the reasons why many people buy it."
"The most valuable feature of the solution for my organization is its UI since it allows us to see the clusters while providing a very specific and good overall understanding."
"The friendly user interface is valuable."
"The solution has simplified our network infrastructure management."
"The WAF - the web application firewall itself - is great."
"The interface and software features are the most valuable aspects of this solution."
"The solution is stable."
"There is a lot of documentation available."
"The product is very stable. We put a decent amount of stress on it given our load."
"The most valuable features are the WAF and the big IP."
"The solution's stability is pretty good."
"It integrates with AWS WAF, which makes it easy to deploy without changes to your infrastructure."
"The most helpful thing is that it's open-source. It's very easy to program and customize."
"Bandwidth optimization and capacity awareness of the bandwidth are valuable features. Its video streaming capabilities are also very useful."
"The load balancing function, the monitors that you can create, and iRules programmability are most valuable."
"The network analytics and monitoring features are not effective."
"One struggle with Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is its integration with other VMware products. Integration could be improved in the solution so that you have a more unified control plane with it and other data center security and networking products that VMware sells. There has been a bit of a lag on the roadmap of new features that have come out there recently, but better interoperability with the hyperscale environments such as the AWS, Azure, GCPs of the world, and simpler deployment and interoperability with those existing tools, are areas that are receiving attention and could use additional attention today. These are the areas for improvement in Avi Networks Software Load Balancer."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"IDS and IPS sites need to be more progressive."
"In terms of improvement, the pricing and documentation need improvement. We have had problems getting the documents."
"Avi Networks Software Load Balancer needs to improve its documentation."
"It doesn't match the development structure or user community of our existing product. It pales in comparison to that."
"I did not go with it because their APM module is a different product altogether. It's a common thing that companies do. They sell something and then they add on top of it as a different product. It is a type of marketing strategy. But when it comes to the overall management, it takes a lot of time to really look into it."
"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."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would expect more integration with different platforms and more integration with the backend systems. Additionally, in the next release, I would like a more secure version."
"Technical support could be faster. It's something I'd like to see them work on in the future."
"Technical support could be improved."
"I would like to see better integration."
"The license terms for "non-commercial" will are challenging for us."
"Its scalability and deployment should be better. It should be more scalable, and it should be easier to deploy."
"It's a very expensive solution."
More Avi Networks Software Load Balancer Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is ranked 9th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 8 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is rated 8.2, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Avi Networks Software Load Balancer writes "Easy to set up and has good integration into the host environment but needs better third party integration". 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". Avi Networks Software Load Balancer is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, HAProxy, NGINX Plus, Radware Alteon and Kemp LoadMaster, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and Radware Alteon. See our Avi Networks Software Load Balancer vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
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.