We performed a comparison between Comodo cWatch and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudflare, Microsoft, Akamai and others in CDN."The FIM feature, the information in the new management system, and their support are the most valuable features. The scanned results are quite fast as compared to other platforms compared to scanning timing. It takes about a minute or two minutes. Also, the results of the Comodo scan results are in detail."
"The solution is pretty stable. I've never faced pressing issues or hanging issue."
"We have multiple solutions we can deploy through the F5."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) improves the resilience and quality of the application itself, the speed and the user experience for the application. The data that the users need from the application is actually acquired faster. So, it provides faster data acquisition."
"The most valuable feature is being able to manipulate the iRules, so you can send traffic to different avenues."
"BIG-IP LTM's most valuable feature is that it allows you to seamlessly add more servers without impacting your application's configuration."
"The Local Traffic Manager (LTM) provides a simple low balance and SSL decryption, in addition to some TCP parameters, for incoming and outgoing traffic to redirect appropriate traffic patterns to appropriate servers."
"It supports APIs and virtual additions for cloud and VMware."
"iRules are very valuable. In addition to that, the way profiles are depicted by the LTM is also very good."
"We plan to create packages of services from which it will be possible to build comprehensive tailor-made solutions."
"A small problem is from the support team. Sometimes they are a bit delayed."
"The solution needs to build better performance, specifically in the hardware resources."
"I used GitHub for autoscaling CloudFormation, and I found two bugs and I submitted them. Their implementation in GitHub could be cleaner and allow for a bit more customization."
"The deployment can take some time because you can do a lot of configuring to meet the needs of the use cases for clients."
"Needs to provide a visual interface to follow a customer's activity (from client to BIG-IP to SNAT IP to the chosen server, then back). Today, we are still performing packet captures."
"If we decide to migrate to the cloud, I don't think that BIG-IP is a good solution and we probably won't use it."
"The cost of the solution is pretty high. It would be ideal if it was more reasonable."
"I would like to see better integration."
"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."
"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."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
Comodo cWatch is ranked 19th in CDN while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Comodo cWatch is rated 9.6, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Comodo cWatch writes "Excellent security, good encryption, and pretty stable". 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". Comodo cWatch is most compared with Cloudflare, Atomic ModSecurity Rules, Sucuri and AWS WAF, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and HAProxy.
We monitor all CDN 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.
