We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Fortinet FortiWeb 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."We're able to do load balancing and global load balancing. When you marry those two products together, you can do a lot more. We're able to deliver our applications more securely and faster. It has improved our deliverability where we have more service across the shared data centers. We can intelligently reach all of those client connections across all of the servers and do it fairly quickly. It has helped improve our application delivery and performance."
"It is a very good, flexible solution. It helps us to catch up on flaws in our partner solutions on top of its load balancing feature."
"Traffic Learning is the most valuable feature."
"Secure and scalable traffic management solution for applications. Good for bigger environments."
"The load balancing function, the monitors that you can create, and iRules programmability are most valuable."
"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."
"Tech support has been very quick to respond to all of the needs that we've had. If you want ad-hoc support. They also provide professional services that you can purchase as well."
"Good application firewall."
"Both the internal firewall management and the cloud can be managed by a single console."
"Auto Learn feature: Makes policy additions or deletions for my customers very simple"
"Other than the additional security with exploit protection, we have simpler certificate handling, as we can keep internal servers using internal certificates continuously distributed and updated by Active Directory Group Policy, while the public certificates become updated only in a single place, FortiWeb itself."
"It helps us prevent attacks on servers."
"The support services, performance, and pricing are all valuable features. The performance is excellent."
"The most valuable feature is ease of use."
"I like FortiWeb's usability and ease of configuration. It's simple to configure rules and exceptions inside the attack log. We block everything by default. If something isn't working, we ask the system admin to adjust the template and add exceptions."
"You have the ability to control everything from one single dashboard."
"Initial setup is tricky, if you do not understand the design of this product."
"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."
"The one gap I saw was that pure LBN integration is a little tricky. The insertion of F5 in LBN is a little tricky. They need to work on something, on products by which they can insert F5 in any sort of cloud environment."
"I would like to see F-5 implement a regular routing like in other Linux-based devices. When we try and integrate in some complex networks, we have to use some additional routing scenarios from a Layer 3 perspective, then we have some problems. It would be great if this were fixed somehow."
"In terms of pricing, it could be more competitive."
"The GUI needs improvement."
"A more intuitive interface would be helpful."
"To improve the product, they could add more load balancing solutions in Kubernetes."
"The reporting could be optimized."
"In terms of performance, it needs to be more robust."
"FortiWeb needs to have support for the newest technology being used in web applications."
"In my experience, Fortinet FortiWeb could improve the intelligent features to acknowledge whether any threat or incident that's running happened. Then give us the ability to escalate it to layer 2 or layer 3 in the network operations."
"The support side of things can be improved."
"If the price was lower, it would be a bit more attractive, as an option, to the customers."
"Another area for improvement is logging. When troubleshooting, the logs sometimes take a while to update. We've had people report that some things aren't logged if they're successful. It's a bit hit-and-miss. For example, sometimes people access one of our services, and it's successful, but we don't see that in the logs."
"Fortinet FortiWeb could improve in reference architecture for different deployment scenarios."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews while Fortinet FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, whereas Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Fortinet FortiWeb report.
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.
