We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, Citrix, HAProxy and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)."Secure and scalable traffic management solution for applications. Good for bigger environments."
"The value and impact of using F5 BIG-IP LTM for application delivery control in our organization are significant."
"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP LTM is it helps our delivery team to make policies and rules for application."
"It has so many features. First of all, it has a full proxy architecture, it has multiple modules. The best feature is the WAF, the web application firewall module. It also has cashing type capabilities. It has all kinds of load-balancing algorithms based on your IT requirements."
"The solution is robust and reliable."
"The stability is excellent."
"It can determine if the system is going down, then route the traffic somewhere else."
"It is the perfect solution when you have high workloads in your IT environment."
"The user interface of Zscaler Private Access is excellent. With proper knowledge and expertise, one can efficiently handle intricate enterprise environments without feeling overwhelmed. This leads to exceptional productivity for managed service providers. The user experience is remarkably streamlined, enabling the management of even the most complex enterprise setups without any excessive complications."
"SASE's most valuable features are proxy and content filtering."
"Users get direct secure access to applications over the internet."
"I like the web filtering capabilities."
"I find all Zscaler Private Access features valuable because each replaces flawed technologies, such as EPAs being replacements for VPN and PR as a replacement for PAM, so I can't mention only one valuable feature. Overall, Zscaler Private Access is a good solution."
"The product's most valuable features are cloud-based services and secure internet access. We don't have to set up any physical appliances."
"I like its ease of use. It has a single pane of glass for the ZIA and ZPA pieces. It is very manageable. It is also very easy to deploy for secure access, and it gives half-decent coverage for visibility in terms of what the users use and what data is being proxied through the access gateway."
"The most valuable feature of Zscaler Private Access is we do not have to connect to a VPN, it is seamless. It is more convenient for us because we use one agent to cover the internet and VPN access."
"BIG-IP LTM's sandboxing integration could be improved."
"The price for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is very high. This aspect could be improved."
"For integration with other AWS environments, we do some tie-ins with some autoscaling groups. This has been challenging for us. We have had issues, where when autoscaling groups scale up, there are some instances which are not showing up in the proper size. Then, those IPs would get registered with F5, but never get released. Therefore, we are ending up with a whole bunch of ghosted IPs."
"The UI could be improved."
"The pricing of the product is a bit too high."
"The web interface could be better."
"Bugs are the part of program and they are fixed with every release, as with any vendor."
"While the licensing is good through the AWS Marketplace, it is more expensive than what you could buy yourself."
"It's an expensive solution."
"There are latency issues with the solution. They are small, however, they are there when you compare it to other vendors."
"It would be better if the Zscaler Private Access team made it easier for people to find subscriptions on the portal, mainly information on what my customers subscribed to or the type of licenses purchased."
"It has massive room for improvement. The Zscaler product itself is okay, but it doesn't give enough granularity for us as an organization to stipulate rules or processes, especially for data-driven services. For instance, we can stick on SSL inspection, but it's just a click box. It doesn't allow us to go any further into the detail of the SSL inspection. We also can't pull it out without having an additional logging server. It just doesn't give us enough granularity. They should give us more control over the interfaces because it is all backend. They weren't very open to discussing their backend architecture with us in terms of their own data centers. They can maybe a little bit more open about what components are there and how the backend infrastructure works alongside Zscaler. Its licensing can be better. Some of the additional licensing costs are quite high, and they should have certain features ready and available as a baseline rather than having to purchase additional licenses for it. Their support should also be improved. I initially had a consultant from Zscaler for its deployment, but the support that I had throughout the deployment of the project wasn't the best."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
"It has a limitation, if you are creating a rule or something for a web application or something, you could only add five users, not more than that. Five or four users are only included in a rule. If you want to create a rule for more than five or four users, you have to go through other methods, not particularly with the application. Working within the application with this method would be quite easy as compared to listing a URL or a normal IP address."
"The stability could be improved."
"The interface needs a bit of work."
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 Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 1st in ZTNA as a Service with 34 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is rated 8.4. 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 Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange writes "Allows for strict access control, granting access to specific applications at a URL level rather than at the physical IP level". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and Barracuda Load Balancer ADC, whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Cloudflare Access and Perimeter 81.
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.
