No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs SecureLink comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Man...
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
124
Ranking in other categories
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) (1st)
SecureLink
Average Rating
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (33rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and SecureLink aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is designed for Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) and holds a mindshare of 12.2%, down 15.7% compared to last year.
SecureLink, on the other hand, focuses on Enterprise Infrastructure VPN, holds 0.8% mindshare, up 0.6% since last year.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)12.2%
NetScaler11.5%
Fortinet FortiADC8.3%
Other68.0%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SecureLink0.8%
OpenVPN Access Server11.7%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks6.4%
Other81.1%
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN
 

Featured Reviews

edshyaa - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at Stryker
Load balancing has improved traffic distribution and currently supports high availability upgrades
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) offers effective load balancing methods that help distribute traffic across our servers, whether we have two or several. This load balancing feature stands out as it is the fundamental work we do with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). While I recognize there are many features, such as iRules, which I have not explored yet, we primarily work on VIPs, pool members, and traffic distribution. The load balancing algorithms' flexibility makes them very useful for our team, enabling us to choose different servers and manage load effectively. We use various methods based on user or application requirements, making the algorithms set up by F5 in the backend quite helpful. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) positively impacts our organization primarily through its load balancing capabilities. We avoid traffic overload on individual servers by placing backend servers behind F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) VIP. This load balancing helps us manage traffic effectively. Since the configuration of the I-series, we have had smooth performance, and with the recent migration to the R-series, it is working faster than before, providing positive outcomes for our operations. Since moving to the R-series, I notice improved performance; it is user-friendly and handles traffic efficiently. The upgrading process is different as we create tenants and a main host. R-series has better CPU and memory, leading to higher throughput with minimal downtime, making it a significant improvement over the I-series.
FS
Deputy Head of IT at a legal firm with 501-1,000 employees
Efficient technical support with good synchronization features, but it needs better security
We would like to be to secure access to all of the servers for all of the internal workers and engineers. We would like to have tools that provide us with security for our servers. I would like to see an improved repository to better see the users. We have a new project that requires a lot of security we will not continue with SecureLink. The security features offered in SecureLink are not enough.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Features such as SSL offloading, various balancing methods, and the ability to work with HTTP, HTTPS, or TCP protocols are beneficial."
"It can determine if the system is going down, then route the traffic somewhere else."
"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."
"Great load balancing."
"The v11 clustering is a new technology they have brought in that does not require improvement. They are the leader in it."
"F5 is much better."
"One of the best features of the solution is the operating system."
"F5 Big-IP Local Traffic Manager has better modular features especially LTM, which according to the clients, is very beneficial, and most of the users opt for a combination of Big-IP LTM and WAF which helps them to leverage application load balancing and enhance application security many-fold."
"The most valuable feature is synchronizing the limited access for partners or sub-contractors."
"Technical support is very efficient and very supportive."
 

Cons

"I think the logging could be improved."
"There should be more logging improvements on F5. The logging features are too limited and do not give us a solid understanding of what's happening."
"The price for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is very high. This aspect could be improved."
"The synchronization does works fairly well. However, if I were to make changes, I would make it easier to start the sync process."
"A more intuitive interface would be helpful."
"The pricing model has caused some frustration. My clients implemented the solution and later wanted to upgrade the features but the pricing structure was complicated. There are other solutions with better pricing models."
"I would recommend that the cost be lowered."
"We need best-practice information. They have something called DevCentral and a blog. But we want something from F5 itself regarding how to tackle the false-positive configurations. If you go into detail with so many configurations it will find so many false positives from the moment it is enabled that it will quickly impact your applications, and it will not work."
"The security features offered in SecureLink are not enough."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"In my view, the cost is somewhat on the higher side. There are discounts available, but I wouldn't say it's overpriced. It's not cheap either, and the value for money is a bit higher from that perspective."
"Our company pays for the licensing cost on a yearly basis. Also, there are no extra costs in addition to the standard licensing fees."
"The cost that they have with AWS are almost prohibitive. I'm being forced to use F5 WAF. I would not simply use it based on cost. I agree that they have some great features, but for me, cost is key in terms of AWS."
"The price of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is too high."
"F5 is more expensive than other solutions, so you have to be sure F5 is the best solution to fit the requirements."
"BIG-IP LTM is considered a premium product, so it's quite expensive and isn't affordable for all customers."
"The licensing strategy for F5 is good."
"Unless the price difference is large, this is not the primary concern for the product. The performance and product-related issues (secure for VPN, multi-function for network device, etc.) are the keys."
"We are not happy with the recent increase in the price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
18%
Construction Company
16%
Wholesaler/Distributor
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business62
Midsize Enterprise32
Large Enterprise86
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP?
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) could improve file upload speeds when opening cases and attaching files; sometimes, downloading files like QKView takes time, depending on size. I expect faste...
What is your primary use case for F5 BIG-IP?
My main use case for F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is placing our applications on F5 and the backend servers on the pool. We also regularly renew SSL certificates before they expire, usuall...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
NISC, Sotera Wireless, InterSystems, Allscripts, Cerner, Allscripts
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, HAProxy, Radware and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.