We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client vs F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
564,599 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Some of the main features of the solution are it has the ability to integrate with our Active Directory to allow each user to have one less password to have to remember and it has great functionality.""Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is very stable.""The most valuable features are that it is really secure and very easy to use.""The setup is quick and easy on the client-side.""The ability to add multiple two-factor authentication options for the user to choose from when they log in has helped increase the security of our network, especially with so many people working remotely.""You don't have to think about it very much. It just works.""The solution works very well. You just click and it's working.""The solution has good performance. It is a simple tool to use, once I turn on Windows it automatically starts to use the VPN."

More Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Pros →

"The solution is very easy to use and easy to understand. It's quite an intuitive system.""One of the greatest things about F5 Load Balancer is that it provides additional capability for handling huge workloads and routing them to an SAP or non-SAP application. It is capable of supporting a large amount of user workload and application connectivity workload. This was the main reason why we chose F5.""NetFlow balancing and traffic balancing are good features.""This is a solution that does what it's supposed to do at the price point.""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.""There is a lot of documentation available.""The stability is excellent.""The scalability of the solution depends on the sizing of the network. Generally, the scalability is quite good."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pros →

Cons
"I think, in general, most of the applications are slow, but this is everyday stuff. I think this is more related to the link speed — the links, the lossage, etc.""The support could be more proactive in their recommendations. I noticed that the Cisco support agents tend to leave customers to do what they need to do in many ways, and you can choose how you want to do it. However, it would be great if they could proactively be involved in best practices and let other customers know how most people are doing it.""Sometimes when you are on the VPN, it can be a little bit slow.""Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client could improve by optimizing the use of the system resources, it is heavy on the resources. Additionally, there could be more transparency.""Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is a stable solution. However, there have been times it has not worked and I needed to call our IT department. It could be more stable.""The setup could be simplified for solutions engineers with a wizard.""The setup is a bit difficult to handle on the server-side.""The configuration from the client-side would be useful. Right now, it's not centralized. There should be a lock so that it can only be configured from one place."

More Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Cons →

"Technical support could be improved.""If we decide to migrate to the cloud, I don't think that BIG-IP is a good solution and we probably won't use it.""The solution could improve the documentation.""The logging features are too limited and do not give us a solid understanding of what's happening.""The deployment can take some time because you can do a lot of configuring to meet the needs of the use cases for clients.""Its scalability and deployment should be better. It should be more scalable, and it should be easier to deploy.""The pricing of the product is a bit too high.""The user experience for dashboards and reports can be improved. They should make dashboards and the reporting system easier for users. They need to add more reports to the dashboard. Currently, for complicated reports, I have to do the customization. It should have more integration with network firewalls to be able to gather all the information required for traffic management."

More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The pricing depends on the requirement, so proper planning and an RF analysis help to properly size the solution and get the best pricing."
  • "The licensing costs are reasonable."
  • "We pay for an annual subscription. Additionally to the subscription, we thought in order to connect this solution to the Active Directory we had to purchase a Cisco ACS, Access Control System. It turns out we did not actually need it."
  • More Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "There are additional costs depending on what modules or what functionality is required."
  • "F5 pricing is too high, compared to Citrix."
  • "When we purchased additional licenses for our other locations, we received a discount of between 20% and 25%."
  • "F5 BIG-IP can be expensive, although there are trial versions available which are helpful to find out if the solution is right for your company."
  • "The price should be reduced because it is expensive when compared to the competition."
  • "The solution is quite expensive if we compare it with the competition."
  • "It is a bit expensive product. Kemp Loadmaster is much cheaper than F5. Its licensing is on a yearly basis. It can be for one year or three years."
  • "The price of the solution is sometimes expensive."
  • More F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Infrastructure VPN solutions are best for your needs.
    564,599 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    Some of the main features of the solution are it has the ability to integrate with our Active Directory to allow each user to have one less password to have to remember and it has great functionality.
    Top Answer: 
    We pay for an annual subscription. Additionally to the subscription, we thought in order to connect this solution to the Active Directory we had to purchase a Cisco ACS, Access Control System. It… more »
    Top Answer: 
    There is one very specific improvement that could be done regarding users logging in. When a user logs in with an expired password we did not know that the password reset function would prompt them… more »
    Top Answer: 
    Its user interface is very easy to use on a day-to-day basis. It is very user-friendly.
    Top Answer: 
    It is a little pricey. I wish the pricing was cheaper, but I wish the pricing was cheaper for everything.
    Top Answer: 
    My only point of contention would be that it is a little pricey.
    Ranking
    Views
    10,710
    Comparisons
    9,128
    Reviews
    10
    Average Words per Review
    427
    Rating
    8.9
    Views
    37,695
    Comparisons
    30,566
    Reviews
    27
    Average Words per Review
    421
    Rating
    8.2
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility, AnyConnect Secure Mobility, Cisco AnyConnect, AnyConnect
    F5 BIG-IP, BIG-IP LTM, F5 ASM, Viprion, F5 BIG-IP Virtual Edition , Crescendo Networks Application Delivery Controller, BIG IP
    Learn More
    Overview

    As mobile workers roam to different locations, an always-on intelligent VPN helps AnyConnect client devices to automatically select the optimal network access point and adapt its tunneling protocol to the most efficient method. This may include voice over IP (VoIP) traffic, TCP-based application access, or Datagram Transport Layer Security (DTLS) protocol for latency-sensitive traffic.

    F5 BIG-IP LTM optimizes the speed and reliability of your apps via both network and application layers. Using real-time protocol and traffic management decisions based on app and server and connection management conditions, and TCP and content offloading, BIG-IP LTM dramatically improves application and infrastructure responsiveness. BIG-IP LTM's architecture includes protocol awareness to control traffic for the most important applications. BIG-IP LTM tracks the dynamic performance levels of servers and delivers SSL performance and visibility for inbound and outbound traffic, to protect the user experience by encrypting everything from the client to the server.

    BIG-IP LTM provides enterprise-class Application Delivery Controller (ADC). You get granular layer 7 control, SSL offloading and acceleration capabilities, and advanced scaling technologies that deliver performance and reliability on-demand. The highly optimized TCP/IP stack combines TCP/IP techniques and improvements in the latest RFCs with extensions to minimize the effect of congestion and packet loss and recovery. Independent testing tools and customer experiences show LTM's TCP stack delivers up to a 2x performance gain for users and a 4x increase in bandwidth efficiency.

    Offer
    Learn more about Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client
    Learn more about F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM)
    Sample Customers
    MST, Molina Healthcare, Ritchie Bros. Auctioneers, Arup, New South Wales Rural FireService
    Riken, TransUnion, Tepco Systems Administration, Daejeon University, G&T Bank, Danamon, CyberAgent Inc.
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Computer Software Company31%
    Comms Service Provider13%
    Energy/Utilities Company13%
    Wireless Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Comms Service Provider26%
    Computer Software Company22%
    Government7%
    Financial Services Firm4%
    REVIEWERS
    Comms Service Provider24%
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Manufacturing Company9%
    Computer Software Company9%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company26%
    Comms Service Provider23%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    Government6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business32%
    Midsize Enterprise18%
    Large Enterprise50%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business33%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise52%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business16%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise63%
    Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) and other solutions. Updated: March 2020.
    564,599 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is ranked 4th in Enterprise Infrastructure VPN with 13 reviews while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is ranked 1st in Application Delivery Controllers (ADC) with 35 reviews. Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is rated 8.6, while F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client writes "Plenty of functionality, integrates with Active Directory, and highly scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) writes "Very stable and easy to use with a good GUI". Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client is most compared with Zscaler Private Access, Fortinet FortiClient, OpenVPN Access Server, Check Point Remote Access VPN and Pulse Connect Secure, whereas F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) is most compared with Microsoft Azure Application Gateway, Citrix ADC, NGINX Plus and HAProxy. See our Cisco AnyConnect Secure Mobility Client vs. F5 BIG-IP Local Traffic Manager (LTM) report.

    We monitor all Enterprise Infrastructure VPN 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.