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)."The setup is pretty easy."
"The solution is very easy to use and easy to understand. It's quite an intuitive system."
"The support from F5 BIG-IP LTM is good."
"You can create multiple virtual servers on F5 BIG-IP technology, and within multiple virtual servers you can have multiple nodes, where a node equals two application servers."
"BIG-IP LTM is completely stable, and its performance is good."
"Good application firewall."
"The solution is robust and reliable."
"We're able to do load balancing and global load balancing. When you marry those two products together, you can do a lot more. We're able to deliver our applications more securely and faster. It has improved our deliverability where we have more service across the shared data centers. We can intelligently reach all of those client connections across all of the servers and do it fairly quickly. It has helped improve our application delivery and performance."
"It is a stable solution."
"The ZPA is a unique feature which offers VPN along with all the additional security needed."
"With SASE, we have a single platform that covers multiple task services with which we need to control access. All the features are equally valuable."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to establish connectivity for remote users and remote endpoints. It offers a high level of granularity compared to typical VPNs, which also encapsulate a lot of I/O."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the manageability of the micro tunnels."
"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 features of Zscaler Private Access are reliability, scalability, and availability."
"The logging features are too limited and do not give us a solid understanding of what's happening."
"I would like F5 to incorporate the ability to create your own custom roles and customised permissions within the product set. I have seen many customers wanting to give a certain level of access for the purposes of out-of-hours servicing to out-of-hours staff or teams that fulfill an operations type role."
"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."
"They could improve the product's ease of use. There is some confusion how to operate it."
"In terms of what could be improved, I would expect more integration with different platforms and more integration with the backend systems. Additionally, in the next release, I would like a more secure version."
"The solution could improve the ease of use, the management could be simplified. Other solutions are easier to use."
"LTM would be improved with the inclusion of signature-based blocking."
"The pricing could always be better. It's a bit expensive."
"Conflicts arise if you do not have the same management teams on the product."
"The granularity in blocking is not sufficient, as new domains are automatically blocked for 30 days without further information."
"The DX layer could be better if it had improved visibility."
"There is improvement in enhancing proper manageability, policies, and logs. So, log management could be improved."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration."
"Sometimes applications crash on some machines, and we’d like Zscaler to give us some information as to why that may have happened. We’d like more detailed reports."
"We'd like to have two-factor authentication that is quite simple."
"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 "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". 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 Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client, whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client and Cloudflare Access.
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.
