We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Radware Bot Manager 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 have found the consistency of the application always being the way it is supposed to be as its most valuable feature."
"It is a fast and available solution."
"The initial setup is easy."
"iRules are very valuable. In addition to that, the way profiles are depicted by the LTM is also very good."
"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP LTM is it helps our delivery team to make policies and rules for application."
"Traffic Learning is the most valuable feature."
"The combination of ADC and WAN is good."
"It offers features Kemp doesn't provide. For example, there are predefined templates for handling Office 365. You can download them for automatic configuration."
"I like how Bot Manager automatically detects when a suspicious user attempts to download content from your website."
"The most valuable feature is the bot management itself and the way it has stopped bots from scraping our site, with its AI mechanism. Its ability to detect and mitigate bots is really good."
"Bot Manager's behavioral modeling and intelligence help us distinguish between harmless and malicious bots."
"Bot Manager is an excellent tool for analyzing traffic to detect suspicious patterns. It uses artificial intelligence to identify malicious behavior."
"It's very good at categorizing the different types of bots, whether they're malicious or good. Bot is a very generic term. It could be good, it could be bad. Quite a lot of legitimate businesses are using bot-type services to just scrape the internet for information."
"The solution provides a rating of the sophistication of the bot attack."
"The deployment could be simplified."
"Right now, there are a lot of products within F5's portfolio. They acquired a couple of companies like NGINX and Volterra. Some features and technologies overlapped when this acquisition occurred. They need to refine it and come up with a single, proper solution. F5 should focus more on zero trust network access (ZTNA).They should be more focused on that framework because the industry is moving towards that. Everyone is talking about SASE and zero trust."
"The license terms for "non-commercial" will be a challenge for us."
"The initial setup can be complex - it's quite flexible in terms of configuration, but the person configuring it needs to understand the application side, the network side, and the server."
"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."
"The initial setup can take a long time."
"If they made it easier for engineers to get F5 training then it would be better."
"They need to improve the interface and some of the functionalities."
"I would like more ability to configure custom rules. Currently, I need to open a ticket with support to request a specific rule that isn't available in the console. In some cases, I don't have visibility into the logs or they are too complicated to analyze."
"We're missing links to their modules for installation and configuration. They have most of them available already, but there were situations for mobile applications that, when they released a new version, were not stable. We had to ask them to send a link by email, and that could be made accessible in the portal."
"It would be beneficial to have a link from the WAF to the Bot Manager portal available so we do not have to log in again."
"Radware Bot Manager is a little costly but not too expensive. It's in the middle."
"It would be good to have more integrations. It's very hard to get data in and out of their portal. It doesn't have any integrations with any of our tools, such as our SIEM tool. It only depends on emails. Having that tied into the warehouse, SIEM, and maybe our on-call tools would be very helpful because it would just give us a holistic picture of everything."
"Bot Manager is doing its job, but I think the behavioral modeling could be improved by adding fingerprinting and automation. Remediation should be automated so that it doesn't require any intervention by the user."
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 Radware Bot Manager is ranked 3rd in Bot Management with 8 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Radware Bot Manager is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Reduces maintenance downtime and has a strong user community". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Radware Bot Manager writes "Categorizes different types of bots very well and is very effective at detecting and mitigating bots in real time". 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 Radware Bot Manager is most compared with Fastly, F5 Shape Security, AWS WAF, Cloudflare and Akamai Bot Manager. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Radware Bot Manager 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.