We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and Fortinet FortiWeb 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 have found the consistency of the application always being the way it is supposed to be as its most valuable feature."
"Great load balancing."
"The solution has good load balancing capabilities."
"We like the capability to combine the content switching with the intrusion prevention and adding the security roles, so we can expose certain sub-pieces outside without exposing everything."
"It has so many features. First of all, it has a full proxy architecture, it has multiple modules. The best feature is the WAF, the web application firewall module. It also has cashing type capabilities. It has all kinds of load-balancing algorithms based on your IT requirements."
"Currently, it's distributing the load perfectly, as per my understanding of our requirements."
"The feature I find the most valuable is the support infrastructure."
"Stable and scalable network traffic management solution for applications. It has good performance."
"The solution is easy to configure and deploy."
"It's stable and works efficiently against OWASP Top 10 attacks."
"When it comes to blocking unknown threats and attacks, I would give it the highest score possible. We first started using AWS and its Web Application Firewalls. That was okay, but it was quite a manual process to keep it up to date, whereas Fortinet is always up to date, and the default rules or the modules that you can turn on are very easy to use."
"The reason I recommend this product is because it guarantees that your network will be safe if it is set up properly and you fully utilize most of the functions."
"It is easy to install and to maintain."
"FortiGate is a stable product."
"The GUI is user-friendly and it's easy to understand how to manage it."
"SSL Offloading simplifies the public certificate handling and brings additional protection features."
"The analytics should provide insight into latency across various traffic routes and virtual servers."
"There are issues with F5 BIG-IP but they are minor issues not affecting production and services. Sometimes the operations and the facility systems fail. However, there is an alert action from the windows. An ordeal for the manager."
"Improvements should enable customers to build a tailor-made solution in the future through a service portal."
"BIG-IP LTM is taking a long time to mature in cloud environments. They plan to improve cloud integration in the next version, but it isn't out yet. It's essential because more companies are moving to the cloud these days and using things like Kubernetes or microservices. F5 needs to improve in that direction, and they are."
"The price for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is very high. This aspect could be improved."
"I would like them to have more flexible models."
"My only point of contention would be that it is a little pricey."
"Technical support is somewhat slow and could be improved."
"I would like to have an antivirus option."
"In my experience, Fortinet FortiWeb could improve the intelligent features to acknowledge whether any threat or incident that's running happened. Then give us the ability to escalate it to layer 2 or layer 3 in the network operations."
"It would also be helpful if they could introduce easier reporting. It's good to have those reports that go to C-level management, and Fortinet does provide some graphs, but if they went into some more detail, that would be great."
"No solution is 100% secure and the security could always be worked on."
"Lacks functionalities that are available in other solutions."
"We want to see more detailed logging, such as audit logging, as this would significantly enhance the solution's reporting. We currently get some information from logs, but more would be better."
"I would like to see more improvements with respect to threat intelligence."
"When we look at the incident reports in the dashboard, they are available for a maximum duration of 24 hours. They should provide more time for the analysis and increase the duration of the availability of these reports. Currently, it gives the options for 5 minutes, 1 hour, and 24 hours. It would be excellent if there are more options for a longer time period. It may be configurable, but I don't know how to do it."
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 FortiWeb is ranked 4th in Web Application Firewall (WAF) with 83 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiWeb is rated 8.0. 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 FortiWeb writes "Cost-effective, easy to configure, and works very well as a single solution for multiple environments". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange, whereas Fortinet FortiWeb is most compared with F5 Advanced WAF, Fortinet FortiADC, AWS WAF, Azure Web Application Firewall and Cloudflare. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. Fortinet FortiWeb report.
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.
