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)."In my team, we work in a very agile environment and the solutions from BIG-IP, including BIG-IP WAF, suit us well when developing and serving our applications."
"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."
"It integrates with AWS WAF, which makes it easy to deploy without changes to your infrastructure."
"We have found the consistency of the application always being the way it is supposed to be as its most valuable feature."
"We always use technical support and the team helps us very well. They're able to effectively find and fix issues and they respond very quickly."
"It is the perfect solution when you have high workloads in your IT environment."
"The most valuable feature is the proxy."
"The most valuable feature I found is iRules."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the CASB solutions, which is protecting their Office 365."
"It is a stable solution."
"We don't need to connect anymore. It is automatically connected when you log on in Windows."
"The user interface of Zscaler Private Access is excellent. With proper knowledge and expertise, one can efficiently handle intricate enterprise environments without feeling overwhelmed. This leads to exceptional productivity for managed service providers. The user experience is remarkably streamlined, enabling the management of even the most complex enterprise setups without any excessive complications."
"I like the web filtering capabilities."
"I find all Zscaler Private Access features valuable because each replaces flawed technologies, such as EPAs being replacements for VPN and PR as a replacement for PAM, so I can't mention only one valuable feature. Overall, Zscaler Private Access is a good solution."
"The product's most valuable features are cloud-based services and secure internet access. We don't have to set up any physical appliances."
"The most valuable features are the File Type Control and SSL bypass policies. We"
"Certificate management needs improvement. I would like automated deployment of new certificates without manual intervention to be in the next release of this product."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is expensive. Pricing needs to be improved."
"A more intuitive interface would be helpful."
"The logging features are too limited and do not give us a solid understanding of what's happening."
"To improve the product, they could add more load balancing solutions in Kubernetes."
"My only point of contention would be that it is a little pricey."
"There is a need for a more modular version to concentrate on the current monolithic structure of both the virtual and hardware versions."
"It is a hardware load balancer, and its installation procedure is more complex than a software load balancer. There are pros and cons of using hardware load balancing. You have to have specific hardware deployed in your data center to activate this load balancer. They never came up with any software-based load balancing solution. It is all hardware-based."
"It would be better if the Zscaler Private Access team made it easier for people to find subscriptions on the portal, mainly information on what my customers subscribed to or the type of licenses purchased."
"We faced certain migration and implementation challenges in executing the tasks, so I would suggest improvement related to the stability of the solution."
"An area for improvement would be the ease of configuration."
"To enhance their offering, it is advisable for them to focus on strengthening the foundation of their architecture. Additionally, they should consider integrating a broader range of services that go beyond what managed service providers typically offer independently."
"Users report application access or latency issues with Zscaler Private Access."
"What could be improved in Zscaler Private Access is its notification. For example, if there's a speed issue, there should be a pop-up that alerts the user about it. If there is a network quality issue, for example, it isn't good enough to connect to, or the network quality is bad, there should be a notification from the solution. Zscaler Private Access also needs improvement in terms of its interface and security."
"It's an expensive solution."
"The stability could be improved."
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 117 reviews while Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is ranked 1st in ZTNA as a Service with 35 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 "Reduces maintenance downtime and has a strong user community". 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 Barracuda Load Balancer ADC, whereas Zscaler Zero Trust Exchange is most compared with Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks, Cato SASE Cloud Platform, Axis Security, Harmony SASE (formerly Perimeter 81) 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.
