We performed a comparison between F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and NGINX Plus 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."It improves the overall performance of applications by decreasing the burden on servers associated with managing and maintaining applications and network sessions, as well as by performing application-specific tasks."
"The web application firewall feature is the most valuable and useful feature. It is a leading industry product when it comes to load balancing. Its user interface is very simple. There isn't a steep learning curve. When we initiate someone to F5, they start using it quickly."
"BIG-IP LTM is completely stable, and its performance is good."
"The BIG-IP’s interface is more intuitive than other GUIs. It is well structured, not overloaded, and does not have too many gimmicks."
"The most valuable features are the WAF and the big IP."
"The most valuable feature is the F5 LTM (Local Traffic Manager). This is the part of the product most organisations will be using most. It provides the core functionality to be able to load balance services and the means and the intelligence to be able to load balance based on advanced logic, e.g., TCL scripting."
"The v11 clustering is a new technology they have brought in that does not require improvement. They are the leader in it."
"Good application firewall."
"The most valuable features are the gateway and the ability to publish to sites."
"The product is lightweight and fast."
"Nginx is extremely efficient in terms of the connection rate to the CPU cycles ratio, and in terms of the bandwidth to CPU cycles."
"The load balancing module, which is equivalent to LTM, is the focus of the PSE. So far, the features of both are identical. I believe NGINX has more features for securing these services, but in terms of load balancing, both are massive solutions."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is simple to configure."
"Its versatility and capabilities make it invaluable for implementing patches and fixes when necessary."
"The flexibility of its modules allow it to be scalable."
"The robust software architecture allows for it to be scalable and very stable."
"There are some aspects of F5 BIG-IP that could be improved, the main one being virtual machine support. We have seen that even with the virtual editions, there are some things that we would like to do that are currently not possible with virtual machines."
"The user interface could be improved in F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager."
"LTM's cloud capabilities could be improved. Cloud providers all offer load balancing, but you can't get the same level of security. F5's cloud service is still not on par with its on-prem service."
"Reporting could be improved and configuration made easier."
"The pricing of the product is a bit too high."
"F5 BIG-IP LTM can improve on the SSL loading which includes the authentication of certificates. Although, most of these issues have been solved there are still some issue that persists."
"Logging is a bit of a problem. Logging and monitoring are only in plain text. You have to search and you have to know what you are searching for to find anything. So of course, monitoring and getting alerts for abnormal situations is hard. There are no tools for monitoring and alerts"
"An expensive solution for the minimal features we use."
"Lack of a feature to print data on the terminal for verification of network traffic during debugging and testing."
"They should do in the open source version of what they did to Advanced HTTP, TCP, and UDP load balancing."
"The biggest room for improvement would be to allow NGINX Core machines to cluster for memory zones in some way with a plug and play module. "
"The solution must improve its performance."
"Make modules easier to enable or disable. The beauty and ugly side of the NGINX modules is you have to know how to compile the module. For beginners or non-very technical aspirant(s) going for NGINX, they have to learn how to compile the modules."
"I would like it to have a more user-friendly graphical interface."
"NGINX Plus is moderately priced, but it could give better value for money."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing model."
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 NGINX Plus is ranked 5th in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 27 reviews. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2, while NGINX Plus is rated 8.8. 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 NGINX Plus writes "Quick installation and very easy to manage while doing orchestration or automation". F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, HAProxy and A10 Networks Thunder ADC, whereas NGINX Plus is most compared with IIS, HAProxy, Kemp LoadMaster, Apache Web Server and Citrix NetScaler. See our F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs. NGINX Plus report.
See our list of best Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) vendors.
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.
