We performed a comparison between Check Point Remote Access VPN and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Remote Access solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It allows everyone to work from home. If no one could work from home, then we wouldn't have a company, especially now during COVID-19. It's mission-critical, especially since it's currently being used. If there is a problem with it, we would really be screwed. We would be hard-pressed because we would have to figure out what solution we're going to go with, how to deploy it, how long it would take to deploy it, and how we'd even get it on people's computers if we couldn't VPN to them. It would be near impossible to just change to a new VPN solution right now."
"Setting policies allow, block, and limit users' access."
"One of the features that I like most about this software is that it has a very intuitive, simple, and versatile interface that makes it easy to use and configure."
"For us, it was essential to integrate with Active Directory, which is our credentials repository."
"The VPN hides your IP address and encrypts your online traffic and it essentially ensures that your fingerprints cannot be traced on the Internet."
"The ability to create your trigger data domains is the solution's most valuable feature."
"Check Point has been perfect for protecting us from any type of attack or data theft during remote management."
"I found the MEP feature the most valuable. This has improved users' latency allowing the users to connect to the nearest Azure Check Point VM."
"It is a fast and available solution."
"I like that F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is a product that comes with valuable features, but what stands out from all features is load balancing."
"F5 BIG-IP is used with good applications and functions as an application firewall with additional features. We will not use any feature or any service unless there is a business case and there is a need for implementation."
"Secure and scalable traffic management solution for applications. Good for bigger environments."
"LTM's most valuable features include application security, data collection, and parameter-level rules."
"Its user interface is very easy to use on a day-to-day basis. It is very user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature of F5 BIG-IP LTM is it helps our delivery team to make policies and rules for application."
"Routing and load balancing are its most valuable features."
"I cannot see the full effect of the endpoint solution because it relies on having access to the DNF queries, which might not go through the Check Point firewall when you're using it for perimeter networks. Check Point will not identify the actual source of the net queries. This may be related to the architecture, however, and not poor product issues. I don't know if it can be improved on the Check Point side or not."
"Improved scalability would allow the solution to handle larger numbers of users and devices without a significant impact on performance."
"The maximum it is giving us is only 5 licenses and if you need more, they must be purchased separately."
"Some configurations, like idle timeout (the requirement came from multiple users), are not possible to configure directly from the Check Point management server."
"Without a doubt and with the new trends in technology, Check Point should already have a blade with a 2MFA solution and not through some other vendor."
"We have noted some stability issues."
"In my organization, there aren't Linux users, however, I know it has difficulties offering secure access for customers who use this operating system."
"The Linux version may have an app (similar to Windows) instead of a shell script."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is sometimes a bit cumbersome to deal with some builds, although that's gotten significantly better over the years."
"The logging features are too limited and do not give us a solid understanding of what's happening."
"I would like to see better integration."
"Currently, the product offers everything we need. I can't recall any features that may be lacking."
"The management interface is unclear, complex, and not concise. I would like a better user interface."
"This is a very expensive solution."
"I'm not very sure about the security with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). We have our own private data center, but we are going to migrate our private data center into the Azure cloud environment. Security will then be a major concern when we migrate our own whole infrastructure to the public cloud."
"In terms of pricing, it could be more competitive."
More Check Point Remote Access VPN Pricing and Cost Advice →
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Remote Access VPN is ranked 5th in Remote Access with 60 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Check Point Remote Access VPN is rated 8.8, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Remote Access VPN writes "Is easy to use and has a nice interface, but the scalability needs to improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". Check Point Remote Access VPN is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, Check Point Harmony Mobile, Fortinet FortiClient and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas 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. See our Check Point Remote Access VPN vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
We monitor all Remote Access 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.