Compare F5 Advanced WAF vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Top Review
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 Advanced WAF vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
534,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"This solution inspects your traffic and based on that, automatically create distinct qualities for you, so you can add this to the policy already created. That's what I like most.""The anti-bot protection is the solution's most valuable feature. Safe-guard or credential staffing are also useful features.""This solution is an enterprise-class firewall that provides both load-balancing and security.""Good dashboard and reporting.""In terms of F5 Advanced WAF's most valuable features, I would definitely say its stability. F5 is one the most stable products. Either as the load balancer or the web application firewall, it is very stable.""I like all of the features, but the main one is the attack signatures.""There is no need to worry about updating signatures because WAF will automatically update the signatures for you.""The support experience is better than average."

More F5 Advanced WAF Pros »

"Traffic Learning is the most valuable feature.""Good application firewall.""The most valuable feature is the proxy.""iRule feature is useful.""F5 has many capabilities for load balancing and web application firewall features.""We always use technical support and the team helps us very well. They're able to effectively find and fix issues and they respond very quickly.""The product is quite flexible.""This is a solution that does what it's supposed to do at the price point."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pros »

Cons
"I would not expect traffic details to pass through the web application firewall across the length of the whole application. I think that there is a web application where it can let the application function without traffic going in into the WAF.""The solution's dashboard could be improved. When you're moving from policy to policy, the logs and the integration of the logs in other systems aren't straightforward.""This solution can be made more user-friendly.""Scalability could be improved.""I would say their graphical interface, the GUI. I don't like the GUI as much as before.""The BIG-IQ is supposed to centralize the management for all of the boxes but it's not very effective.""The contextual-based component needs a lot of help to catch up with the next-gen products.""There is a learning curve that extends the time of implementation."

More F5 Advanced WAF Cons »

"This is a very expensive solution.""It's a very expensive solution.""If they made it easier for engineers to get F5 training then it would be better.""Reporting could be improved and configuration made easier.""The logging features are too limited and do not give us a solid understanding of what's happening.""The web interface could be better.""The cost of the solution is pretty high. It would be ideal if it was more reasonable.""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."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Licensing fees for this solution are paid on a yearly basis.""It's more expensive than other solutions and depending on the modules, there can be additional fees.""F5 bundles up services and the bundle is what you pay for rather than individual components.""Its price is fair. We have done a couple of deals where they were able to give some kind of discount to the customers. The price was initially high for the customers, but after a couple of negotiations, it came within their budget. They were happy with that.""There are various plans available for Fortinet FortiWeb Cloud WAF as a Service, including a trial version.""It is expensive. Its price should be better. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. Its licensing is also based on the model. There are no additional costs.""I don't have any issue with the pricing of this solution."

More F5 Advanced WAF Pricing and Cost Advice »

"There are additional costs depending on what modules or what functionality is required.""F5 pricing is too high, compared to Citrix.""When we purchased additional licenses for our other locations, we received a discount of between 20% and 25%.""F5 BIG-IP can be expensive, although there are trial versions available which are helpful to find out if the solution is right for your company.""The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition.""The solution is quite expensive if we compare it with the competition.""It is a bit expensive product. Kemp Loadmaster is much cheaper than F5. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. It can be for one year or three years.""The price of the solution is sometimes expensive."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Web Application Firewall (WAF) solutions are best for your needs.
534,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: credential attack protection, virtual patching.
Top Answer: I don't have any issue with the pricing of this solution. I am only involved with the technical portion of it.
Top Answer: I would like to see the API Protection improved.
Top Answer: The stability is excellent.
Top Answer: The pricing is pretty high. It's not the least expensive option. That said, we're willing to pay for the premium security on offer.
Top Answer: The pricing of the product is a bit too high. They should work to make it more affordable. It needs to be more cost-efficient.
Ranking
Views
5,891
Comparisons
4,301
Reviews
13
Average Words per Review
602
Rating
8.5
Views
40,697
Comparisons
32,512
Reviews
22
Average Words per Review
419
Rating
8.3
Comparisons
Also Known As
F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
Learn More
Overview

F5's Advanced WAF is built on proven F5 technology and goes beyond reactive security such as static signatures and reputation to proactively detect and mitigate bots, secure credentials and sensitive data, and defend against application denial-of-service (DoS). Advanced WAF redefines application security to address the most prevalent threats organizations face today.

Advanced WAF is offered as an appliance, virtual edition, and as a managed service—providing automated WAF services that meet complex deployment and management requirements while protecting your apps with great precision. It is the most effective solution for guarding modern applications and data from existing and emerging threats while maintaining compliance with key regulatory mandates.

Advanced WAF redefines application security to address the most prevalent threats organizations face today:

•Web attacks that steal credentials and gain unauthorized access across user accounts.
•Application layer attacks that evade static security based on reputation and manual signatures.
•New attack surfaces and threats due to the rapid adoption of APIs.
•OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities

F5 BIG-IP LTM optimizes the speed and reliability of your apps via both network and application layers. Using real-time protocol and traffic management decisions based on app and server and connection management conditions, and TCP and content offloading, BIG-IP LTM dramatically improves application and infrastructure responsiveness. BIG-IP LTM's architecture includes protocol awareness to control traffic for the most important applications. BIG-IP LTM tracks the dynamic performance levels of servers and delivers SSL performance and visibility for inbound and outbound traffic, to protect the user experience by encrypting everything from the client to the server.

BIG-IP LTM provides enterprise-class Application Delivery Controller (ADC). You get granular layer 7 control, SSL offloading and acceleration capabilities, and advanced scaling technologies that deliver performance and reliability on-demand. The highly optimized TCP/IP stack combines TCP/IP techniques and improvements in the latest RFCs with extensions to minimize the effect of congestion and packet loss and recovery. Independent testing tools and customer experiences show LTM's TCP stack delivers up to a 2x performance gain for users and a 4x increase in bandwidth efficiency.

Offer
Learn more about F5 Advanced WAF
Learn more about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)
Sample Customers
MAXIMUS, Vivo, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office, City Bank
Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm40%
Non Tech Company20%
Energy/Utilities Company10%
Printing Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company28%
Comms Service Provider26%
Financial Services Firm9%
Government5%
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider24%
Financial Services Firm18%
Manufacturing Company10%
Energy/Utilities Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company26%
Comms Service Provider23%
Financial Services Firm8%
Government6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business25%
Midsize Enterprise35%
Large Enterprise40%
REVIEWERS
Small Business32%
Midsize Enterprise14%
Large Enterprise54%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business18%
Midsize Enterprise17%
Large Enterprise65%
Find out what your peers are saying about F5 Advanced WAF vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and other solutions. Updated: September 2020.
534,226 professionals have used our research since 2012.

F5 Advanced WAF is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 14 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 30 reviews. F5 Advanced WAF is rated 8.4, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of F5 Advanced WAF writes "It is very stable as as a load balancer or a web application firewall". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Very stable and easy to use with a good GUI". F5 Advanced WAF is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Fortinet FortiWeb, NGINX App Protect, Imperva Web Application Firewall and Citrix Web App and API Protection, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix ADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus, HAProxy and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our F5 Advanced WAF vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.

We monitor all Web Application Firewall (WAF) 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.