We performed a comparison between Checkmarx One and F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The user interface is modern and nice to use."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is that its number of false positives is less than the other security application platforms. Its ease of use is another good feature. It also supports most of the languages."
"It has all the features we need."
"The main thing we find valuable about Checkmarx is the ease of use. It's easy to initiate scans and triage defects."
"We use the solution to validate the source code and do SAST and security analysis."
"It is a stable product."
"The report function is the solution's greatest asset."
"Helps us check vulnerabilities in our SAP Fiori application."
"The F5 GTM/BIGIP DNS (Global Traffic Manager) is a valuable feature. This feature allows for DNS load balancing, which means that high availability and load sharing can be done across services locally, as well as across datacenters with advanced capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is customization."
"We plan to create packages of services from which it will be possible to build comprehensive tailor-made solutions."
"Great load balancing."
"NetFlow balancing and traffic balancing are good features."
"Initial setup is easy and pretty standard."
"We have multiple solutions we can deploy through the F5."
"The tech support we got from F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager directly was pretty good."
"The resolutions should also be provided. For example, if the user faces any problem regarding an installation due to the internal security policies of their company, there should be a resolution offered."
"Checkmarx could improve the REST APIs by including automation."
"You can't use it in the continuous delivery pipeline because the scanning takes too much time."
"As the solution becomes more complex and feature rich, it takes more time to debug and resolve problems. Feature-wise, we have no complaints, but Checkmarx becomes harder to maintain as the product becomes more complex. When I talk to support, it takes them longer to fix the problem than it used to."
"Checkmarx needs to improve the false positives and provide more accuracy in identifying vulnerabilities. It misses important vulnerabilities."
"We would like to be able to run scans from our local system, rather than having to always connect to the product server, which is a longer process."
"Checkmarx could improve the solution reports and false positives. The false positives could be reduced. For example, we have alerts that are tagged as vulnerabilities but when you drill down they are not."
"The lack of ability to review compiled source code. It would then be able to compete with other scanning tools, such as Veracode."
"The cost of the solution is pretty high. It would be ideal if it was more reasonable."
"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."
"Certificate management needs improvement. I would like automated deployment of new certificates without manual intervention to be in the next release of this product."
"It's a very expensive solution."
"I'm not very sure about the security with F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM). We have our own private data center, but we are going to migrate our private data center into the Azure cloud environment. Security will then be a major concern when we migrate our own whole infrastructure to the public cloud."
"The ASM administration is quite complex. The topic itself is pretty complex, so it is not easy to provide a nice, clean interface. There are a lot of references and dependencies in-between the different subareas."
"F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager is expensive. Pricing needs to be improved."
"I think the logging could be improved."
More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx One is ranked 3rd in Application Security Tools with 67 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 116 reviews. Checkmarx One is rated 7.6, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Checkmarx One writes "The report function is a great, configurable asset but sometimes yields false positives". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Helps deliver applications to users in a reliable, secure, and optimized way". Checkmarx One is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Coverity, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Citrix NetScaler, Fortinet FortiADC, Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, NGINX Plus and A10 Networks Thunder ADC. See our Checkmarx One vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
