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."Once we install and connect the VPN service, it keeps on running until we disconnect."
"It is easy to install the Endpoint Remote Access VPN client to different platforms."
"The tool is easy to configure and use. We integrated it with Active Directory to manage user authentication. It's intuitive and transparent, making it simple for users to use. It connects automatically to the VPN whenever users turn on the laptop. The product is efficient and offers centralized control."
"One of the features that I like most about this software is that it has a very intuitive, simple, and versatile interface that makes it easy to use and configure."
"One of the most outstanding features is the ability to deliver third-party services and achieve double authenticity with integrated identities."
"The solution offers high scalability as far as adding more users."
"Scalability is great. We have been able to grow as a corporation due in part to this type of solution."
"It is easy to install the Endpoint Remote Access VPN client on different platforms."
"The solution is robust and reliable."
"In my team, we work in a very agile environment and the solutions from BIG-IP, including BIG-IP WAF, suit us well when developing and serving our applications."
"There is a lot of documentation available."
"I've worked a little bit with iRules and it is amazing."
"It improves the overall performance of applications by decreasing the burden on servers associated with managing and maintaining applications and network sessions, as well as by performing application-specific tasks."
"The most valuable feature is being able to manipulate the iRules, so you can send traffic to different avenues."
"If I were to choose one key feature in particular, perhaps it would be the iRule feature. It’s a really versatile tool."
"NetFlow balancing and traffic balancing are good features."
"The Compliance software blade is available only for the Windows operating systems family, so no macOS security checks are implemented and performed."
"The maximum it is giving us is only 5 licenses and if you need more, they must be purchased separately."
"There was complexity in the initial setup."
"The interface itself needs improvement. When you need to create something, you have to go through a lot of steps. It needs to be simplified."
"Compliance Check on Check Point should be improved by having more configurable conditions to support multi-platforms and adding more granularity."
"Generally, the license is included with the Check Point gateway licensing, however, in terms of the number of users that can be activated for use, it is generally five users."
"Sometimes the application slows down the computing device, and this affects workflows."
"I would like the support to be faster."
"This is a very expensive solution."
"It reaches a point where scaling is no longer possible."
"It requires a particular skill or training before being able to manage it."
"The license terms for "non-commercial" will are challenging for us."
"There are issues with F5 BIG-IP but they are minor issues not affecting production and services. Sometimes the operations and the facility systems fail. However, there is an alert action from the windows. An ordeal for the manager."
"We need best-practice information. They have something called DevCentral and a blog. But we want something from F5 itself regarding how to tackle the false-positive configurations. If you go into detail with so many configurations it will find so many false positives from the moment it is enabled that it will quickly impact your applications, and it will not work."
"If one virtual portion is unavailable, it can cause issues."
"There is a need for a more modular version to concentrate on the current monolithic structure of both the virtual and hardware versions."
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 4th in Remote Access with 60 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 "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient 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 HAProxy. 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.