We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Fortinet FortiADC 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 use F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager to balance traffic."
"It is a scalable solution."
"iRules are very valuable. In addition to that, the way profiles are depicted by the LTM is also very good."
"Currently, it's distributing the load perfectly, as per my understanding of our requirements."
"The load balancing function, the monitors that you can create, and iRules programmability are most valuable."
"It is a fast and available solution."
"The solution is very easy to use and easy to understand. It's quite an intuitive system."
"The main reason that we suggest this product to our clients is the great integration with other security tools, such as IBM Guardium."
"Ease of use in deploying and having it up and running requires minimal knowledge."
"The product has flexible and interesting licensing options."
"Content caching and content compression are good features."
"The solution provides high-level services such as availability, redundancy, and load balancing between servers."
"Because ADC is the intermediary between the servers and the end-user application, it gives thorough information about the traffic, what the problem is."
"Fortinet FortiADC is a good product because each and every piece of content is monitored by it."
"Key features include SSL Offloading, VM availability, and L7 load balancing."
"The main feature that we use is GSLB (Global Server Load Balancing). GSLB makes the customer's network more reliable by scaling applications across multiple datacenters. GSLB as a disaster recovery solution can direct traffic based on site availability."
"The solution is scalable."
"The pricing of the product is a bit too high."
"It would be good to have better traffic and better data. It would be nice to have more granularity to see packets in terms of the header details, the analytics, etc. It would be nice if that was also part of it and to have analytics added to the traffic."
"The auto logout feature after three minutes is terrible. I wish they would make that longer, since it is not a feature that we can change."
"I would like to see improvement in the manageability and easier setup."
"The price for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is very high. This aspect could be improved."
"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."
"My only point of contention would be that it is a little pricey."
"The L7 Persistent load-balancing algorithm has not worked for me after having tested it many times with my customer's in-house application. I'd like to suggest that the company make sure that all load-balancing algorithms work properly with most applications, even those that are in-house apps."
"Setup could be easier. The company's homework is to redesign those menus to configure with the smallest number of steps."
"I had a terrible experience with Fortinet support. I only used support once when I bought the solution. I got no response for two days. However, I believe that it's no longer the case. Fortinet solutions have problems when they're launched. For example, we had issues with Fortinet's authenticator when it came out. We also had trouble with FortiNAC in the beginning."
"It would be good if they built in a fully functional web application firewall."
"There is a mismatch between the number of features they are offering and the device capacity on how much it can handle."
"I think it would be helpful if Fortinet put more video examples on their cookbook site."
"The product’s price could be reduced. Also, some of its features need to be more advanced."
"The solution should improve finding false positives and false negatives. There are a lot of false positives."
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 FortiADC is ranked 8th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 19 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiADC is rated 7.8. 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 Fortinet FortiADC writes "High-level load balancing and routing protocols but scalability is limited to 200 gigabits". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and HAProxy, whereas Fortinet FortiADC is most compared with Fortinet FortiWeb, Citrix NetScaler, Kemp LoadMaster, A10 Networks Thunder ADC and HAProxy. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Fortinet FortiADC report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
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.