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

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) vs SonicWall Mobile Connect comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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)
SonicWall Mobile Connect
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and SonicWall Mobile Connect 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 11.9%, down 15.9% compared to last year.
SonicWall Mobile Connect, on the other hand, focuses on Enterprise Infrastructure VPN, holds 1.1% mindshare, up 1.1% since last year.
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)11.9%
NetScaler11.3%
HAProxy8.1%
Other68.69999999999999%
Application Delivery Controllers (ADC)
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
SonicWall Mobile Connect1.1%
OpenVPN Access Server10.9%
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks6.4%
Other81.6%
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.
Rich Darress - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Operating Officer at Darress Tech
A straightforward tool with high adoption rate due to its user-friendliness
SonicWall Mobile Connect’s marketing efforts are commendable; they may not be perceived as the most secure player compared to Fortinet or Meraki. SonicWall Mobile Connect should focus on positioning itself as a strong contender in the mid-market segment to improve its standing. Many high-end engineers dismiss it in favor of Fortinet or Meraki, often due to a lack of firsthand experience.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The v11 clustering is a new technology they have brought in that does not require improvement. They are the leader in it."
"It has helped a lot to protect our organization from external attacks, especially XSS or XSRF types of attacks."
"There were a lot of good features. The most beneficial for maintaining server health included the algorithms for the virtual IP, which segment traffic between servers, authentication profiles, and many other things."
"F5 is much better."
"The solution is the most requested by our customers, so it's an important direction for our business."
"F5 was a virgin solution to a point problem and quickly grew to a central position in the management of our enterprise infrastructure and digital tier by demonstrating quickly a value contribution made to our live service offering."
"Our experience has been a positive one."
"Be sure of what you will use; F5 isn’t cheap but is worth the price."
"The solution benefits IT managers in backend programming. The ease of configuring and securing it while ensuring security measures is crucial. The tool is easy in terms of user experience. It is straightforward."
"The solution offers multiple OS support."
"The technical support is fine."
"The ease of use is great. It's pretty easy for users to get on the tablet or whatever and select the bookmark they need and just take it over."
"I can say that it's stable and the performance is acceptable."
"This is a stable and reliable solution."
 

Cons

"Its price can be better. It is a bit expensive."
"The synchronization does works fairly well. However, if I were to make changes, I would make it easier to start the sync process."
"My only point of contention would be that it is a little pricey."
"I would like them to expand load balancing, being able to go across multiple regions to on-premise and into the cloud. This could use improvement, as it is sometimes a little cumbersome."
"Native support for containers should be added to future releases, as this is the future of load balancing."
"I wouldn't recommend the tool to small companies, considering its high price and the infrastructure needs of small businesses."
"LTM would be improved with the inclusion of signature-based blocking."
"The price of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is too high."
"Lacks multiple cloud integration."
"SonicWall Mobile Connect’s marketing efforts are commendable; they may not be perceived as the most secure player compared to Fortinet or Meraki. SonicWall Mobile Connect should focus on positioning itself as a strong contender in the mid-market segment to improve its standing. Many high-end engineers dismiss it in favor of Fortinet or Meraki, often due to a lack of firsthand experience."
"Licensing includes things that my customers don't need."
"Technical support can always get better. Any time you have to call in for any certain thing, it can be difficult."
"The solution would be improved if SonicWall would also offer it as a cloud-based service. I would also like to see it include multiple cloud integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is quite expensive as a product. Because it is very stable, it is also expensive."
"Check other vendors like Cisco, Citrix or A10 Networks. There are plenty in the market with which you can achieve same thing."
"This product is costly from a licensing perspective considering its competitors."
"Security should be involved in any base license. When you bring on F5, you only have default license. Then, the ASM product license has to be purchased. It would be great if F5 could include the ASM in the base license."
"The licensing strategy for F5 is good."
"The price of F5 BIG-IP LTM could improve."
"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."
"Take a look at the modules that you are going to use. Look into the best bundles for them."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Outsourcing Company
13%
Construction Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
No data available
 

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.
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about F5, HAProxy, NetScaler and others in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC). Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.