Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer vs webMethods ActiveTransfer comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Fortra's Globalscape Manage...
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods ActiveTransfer
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
17th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is 1.7%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods ActiveTransfer is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
Unique Categories:
No other categories found
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

AP
Jul 18, 2022
Enables us to automate processes and reduce dependency on other technologies
The most valuable feature is the automation engine because it allows you to script or program and it has lots of different features and options. It's something like an IDE for programmers, where they can add variables, arrays, loops, et cetera. It has much more functionality than the advanced rules component, which only has limited options. You can use automated scripts, such as those built with PowerShell, in GlobalSCAPE, as well as scripts that you build in Globalscape. It's also very important that it is designed specifically for Windows because our servers are Windows and everything that we do is in Windows. Of course, we have a few Linux servers and even an SFTP server, but it's very important to be in the Windows space. In addition, we use it to automate the submission of regulatory documentation and that is another very important functionality for us.
Michele Illiano - PeerSpot reviewer
Nov 18, 2022
Can function as an ESB along with the core product, with decent integration of message protocols
I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance. This is why, for most customers who have to deal with big files, I suggest that they use a product other than ActiveTransfer. I would like to note that this problem mainly concerns large files that undergo extra operations, such assigning, unassigning, or file translation. When these operations take place on large files, ActiveTransfer will use up a lot of resources. Within the product itself, I also believe that there is room for improvement in terms of optimization when it comes to general performance. I suspect that the issues underlying poor optimization are because it is all developed in Java. That is, all the objects and functions that are used need to be better organized, especially when it comes to big files but also overall. webMethods ActiveTransfer was born as an ESB to handle messages, and these messages were typically very short, i.e. small in size. A message is data that you have to send to an application, where it must be received in real-time and possibly processed or acknowledged elsewhere in the system as well. So, because it was initially designed for small messages, it struggles with performance when presented with very large files. All this to say, I suggest that they have an engineer reevaluate the architecture of the product in order to consider cases where large files are sent, and not only small ones. As for new features, compared to other products in the market, I think Software AG should be more up to date when it comes to extra protocol support, especially those protocols that other solutions have included in their products by default. Whenever we need to add an unsupported protocol, we have to go through the effort of custom development in order to work with it. Also, all the banks are obligated to migrate to the new standards, and big companies are all handling translations and operating their libraries with the new protocol formats. But webMethods ActiveTransfer doesn't seem to be keeping up with this evolution. Thus, they should aim to be more compliant in future, along the lines of their competitors such as IBM and Primeur.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the automation engine, because it allows you to script or program and it has lots of different features and options. It's something like an IDE for programmers, where they can add variables, arrays, loops, et cetera."
"A job skeleton can be used from test to production so you don't have to build jobs from scratch in production."
"It bolsters security with features like Data Loss Prevention and seamless integration with DLP for a safe and compliant environment which enables real-time document sharing and control over file actions."
"The Event Rules functionality is a key feature. It is very simple to understand and work with. If you have a support team that doesn't know anything about coding, they can really relate to the way event rules are designed. So, I try to make them as simplistic as possible when we create file transmissions. When I first started working in Globalscape, a lot of the file transmissions were handled through Advanced Workflow, which is a similar product. We had a lot of scripts in Advanced Workflow. I moved them to Event Viewer in Globalscape because of the simplicity of building scripts and understanding how they work. It literally takes 5 to 10 minutes to set one up, but if you're in an advanced workflow, it could take an hour to two hours to understand via code what it is actually doing. It has definitely been a plus."
"It made things easier. Before, there were five to 10 different software solutions spread out over 10 different servers. Now, everything is being centralized into one location; facilitating, supporting, maintaining, training people, etc. There have been gains just because Globalscape EFT is more efficient at moving things around than our previous other applications. For instance, if I am connecting to someone over the Internet or transmitting for the client, the speed of transmitting those files through SFTP is 20% to 30% faster than our previous automated solution. Therefore, we have seen time savings."
"Its ease of use is most valuable. Especially for the configuration of the rules, we don't need to have any scripting knowledge. Previously, we used to have a lot of custom scripts to transfer these files. Now, it's all managed in one place, and it's like a self-service. It's saving a lot of time for us."
"The High Security Module is valuable. It allows for increased security. It allows me to integrate Globalscape with our Active Directory. So, we manage all our customer accounts outside of Globalscape, and it allows us to import them with LDAP queries. It's very convenient. It also gives our customers the confidence that it's a very secure product."
"The fact that it is Windows-based was a huge factor for us because most of our endpoints are Windows-based. And the ability to configure it means standardization is available with the product."
"The core product can be used not only for automatic file transfers between applications, but also as an Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)."
"ActiveTransfer lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it. After that, we can remove the file to make sure that the reconciliation process is done. Sometimes we will zip and unzip the files, but if we have a GKB file, we often ignore it."
 

Cons

"The folder monitoring services need improvement. Currently, with the folder monitoring services in Globalscape, if any changes are made to our firewalls, network, or something else that affects the directory services where the files are located, for some reason, the folder monitoring services get cut out, and the files are left there. They remain in the folder without being sent. I have over 50 file transmission processes that I would have to go to manually re-drop a file into the folder so that it processes the file transmission. There are times where even though I re-drop a file, it still doesn't work. In that case, I have to resynchronize the folder monitoring process, and it is a very big headache on my side that I have to deal with. It is not only related to Globalscape or their development team. It is on our side too. I just sent a support case where we found out yesterday that we had a file transmission that hasn't run in a whole year, and it was an important one. No one on the business side or the IT support side, as well as the vendor, had indicated that the file wasn't received or the data hadn't been updated. I found out that it was the folder monitoring service that was the problem when I initially had the problem last October, and this was the file that I just missed. So, I re-dropped the file in yesterday, and the monitor worked. It runs every week, so we sent a file to that folder, and it processed that out."
"There are two ways to install Globalscape: as a standalone server or as a high-availability server, either Active-Active or Active-Standby. We are currently using standalone servers. That means if we want to upgrade the software, I shut down one of the two back-end servers, upgrade the software, make sure everything is correct, and then turn traffic back on to that one. I then proceed to upgrade the second server. With their high-availability solution, that is not a possibility. Both servers have to be shut down to perform the upgrade. We're a 24/7 shop. We don't have a window where we can have downtime."
"We need some capability for faster transfers and large file transfers. If we want to transfer a terabyte file, it is not capable of doing that right now. They say it is possible, but we are not able to do so with our environment."
"In the beginning, it could be considered a bit challenging."
"Another area for improvement is the ARM (Auditing and Reporting Module) database, in terms of accuracy and the data being logged."
"It could improve its operations by incorporating real-time collaboration features like those offered by platforms such as Microsoft OneDrive and Office 365."
"Instead of using a fat client to access the administrator panel, where you have to install client software on any server that you need to use to access, I would like them to switch to a web-based model where you could connect from anywhere without having to maintain and install the software."
"I do have some complaints or concerns around the centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations, and I know that they're working towards a better solution there. At its core, it's a good feature, but needs some improvements. I would like to see a web interface so that there is universal support across versions, because we have test and production environments that aren't always in sync. It would be nice to have one administrative interface to access both."
"I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance."
"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is reasonably priced in comparison to other products."
"A large factor in our decision to go with Globalscape was the price."
"It is a very good product in terms of purchase. It didn't cost that much, even with the way we had scaled and architecturally put things in place. It is definitely comparable to other products."
"The on-prem licensing is very good. It's a perpetual license and I would advise others to purchase that license. That way, you don't have to pay yearly."
"We are paying around 30K per year."
"Maintenance and services for Globalscape EFT have an annual price tag, and it is not cheap."
"Globalscape is not cheap, but you get what you pay for. The cost is worth the value of the product. What you're getting is a good, stable solution that does a lot."
"It offers excellent value and its pricing is straightforward, making it easy to acquire, set up, and use."
"Sometimes we don't have a very clear idea what the licensing will entail at first, because it can be very customizable. On one hand, this can be a good thing, because it can be tailored to a specific customer's needs. But on the other hand it can also be an issue when some customer asks, "What's the cost?" and we can't yet give them an accurate answer."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Computer Software Company
15%
Healthcare Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Globalscape Managed File Transfer?
It bolsters security with features like Data Loss Prevention and seamless integration with DLP for a safe and compliant environment which enables real-time document sharing and control over file ac...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Globalscape Managed File Transfer?
It offers excellent value and its pricing is straightforward, making it easy to acquire, set up, and use. While there are some areas where it could improve, such as GUI and collaboration features, ...
What needs improvement with Globalscape Managed File Transfer?
It could improve its operations by incorporating real-time collaboration features like those offered by platforms such as Microsoft OneDrive and Office 365. These features include tracking changes,...
What do you like most about webMethods ActiveTransfer?
The core product can be used not only for automatic file transfers between applications, but also as an Enterprise Service Bus (ESB).
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for webMethods ActiveTransfer?
The licensing depends on the type of customer, so I would refrain from talking about it in an absolute kind of way. Overall, it's somewhat expensive, and depending on customer requirements, there a...
What needs improvement with webMethods ActiveTransfer?
I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the softwa...
 

Also Known As

Globalscape GlobalSCAPE Managed File Transfer
No data available
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods ActiveTransfer and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,817 professionals have used our research since 2012.