We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Peplink SpeedFusion based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."We use F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager to balance traffic."
"Users can see a remarkable performance difference from a qualitative sense."
"F5 Big-IP Local Traffic Manager has better modular features especially LTM, which according to the clients, is very beneficial. Most of the users opt for a combination of big IP LTM and WAF which helps them to leverage application load balancing and enhance application security many-fold."
"Traffic Learning is the most valuable feature."
"The value and impact of using F5 BIG-IP LTM for application delivery control in our organization are significant."
"We enjoy its overall ease of use."
"We have multiple solutions we can deploy through the F5."
"The solution is easy to install. It's a straightforward process."
"The valuable feature is that, after reading about its capabilities and using it for a while, Peplink SpeedFusion employs eight technologies within its SD-WAN profile, addressing issues like packet loss and latency. The solution is highly stable. I rate it a nine out of ten. The support team gives quick response and efficient local support."
"The SpeedFusion feature is good. It allowed us to move away from IPsec between the sites. It is also a really easy product to deploy."
"Our customers find it to be an interesting and tempting solution."
"It is a very stable product."
"The most valuable feature is the virtual VPN concentrator."
"The SpeedFusion feature is the most valuable."
"In the Philippines, VPN usage may not be widely known, but we leverage VPN effectively within my organization. I've shared our in-house systems with other district offices, as I cover fifteen municipalities and cater to the entire province. This platform is a valuable tool for us, enabling collaborative work, and allowing us to update our services remotely."
"A more intuitive interface would be helpful."
"The solution is scalable."
"There is a need for a more modular version to concentrate on the current monolithic structure of both the virtual and hardware versions."
"F5 has another solution to load balance servers on the cloud, which they got after the purchase of NGINX. It is deployed as Kubernetes or something like that, but the problem now is that they have two solutions for two situations. They should make F5 deployable on the cloud."
"F5 could improve the rule-setting capabilities in the GUI, and they need to simplify web management. For example, the menus in the Citrix GUI are easier to navigate, with a clean structure and layout."
"The management interface is unclear, complex, and not concise. I would like a better user interface."
"We would like to see load balancing between the cloud and the on-premise, a straightforward deployment feature."
"The product is expensive."
"I believe there could be some enhancements in the enterprise segment, offering greater options or something similar."
"Their hardware support isn't the greatest. We've had one unit go down, and it took a while for them to replace it. It was in the Caribbeans, so it might be a location-related issue."
"The product needs to aggregate the bandwidth of different ISPs. It needs to improve scalability as well."
"Its pricing is the main issue. The pricing could be improved. I would like to see an outbound policy based on the application. It is a very good feature, and most of the customers are looking for that. They can also include stronger firewall features. This would help the customers in choosing this product as the only device for the SD network."
"The stability has room for improvement."
"They don't have next generation firewall, UTM, like the other competitors."
"There is room for improvement in enhancing security features, such as incorporating intrusion detection blocking capabilities and integrating artificial intelligence to bolster security aspects on the device."
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 Peplink SpeedFusion is ranked 11th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 8 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Peplink SpeedFusion is rated 8.8. 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 Peplink SpeedFusion writes "Helps to connect remote systems and offers collaborative features ". 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, whereas Peplink SpeedFusion is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cradlepoint NetCloud, Cisco SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN and Sangfor SSL VPN.
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.