ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Aspera Managed File Transfer comparison

ActiveBatch by Redwood and IBM are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked #15 with an average rating of 7.5, while IBM is ranked #13 with an average rating of 9.0. ActiveBatch by Redwood holds a 2.5% mindshare in MFT, compared to IBM’s 2.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of ActiveBatch by Redwood users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 80% of IBM users who would recommend it.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Read 37 ActiveBatch by Redwood reviews

2,226 Views
712 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Aspera Managed File Transfer

Read 4 Aspera Managed File Transfer reviews

829 Views
812 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Aspera Managed File Transfer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Aspera Managed File Transfer and ActiveBatch by Redwood compete in the data management solutions category. Aspera stands out with superior data transfer speed, while ActiveBatch offers comprehensive workflow automation.

Features: Aspera is known for its high-speed data transfer, security protocols, and scalability. It provides a secure infrastructure for rapid file exchanges. ActiveBatch offers workflow automation, integration capabilities, and process optimization, serving as a versatile tool for automating business processes.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Aspera Managed File Transfer features easy implementation but requires technical know-how for complex setups, supported by accessible customer service. ActiveBatch provides flexible deployment with a supportive network, aiding intricate automation setups with comprehensive support.

Pricing and ROI: Aspera presents a competitive pricing model with ROI through reduced transfer times and operational costs. ActiveBatch involves a higher initial investment with ROI gained through resource optimization and improved process efficiency. The contrast lies in Aspera’s cost-effectiveness for data tasks versus ActiveBatch’s justified higher costs for extensive automation.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Aspera Managed File Transfer Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Aspera Managed File Transfer

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,768 peers since 2012

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

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

15th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (29th), Workload Automation (15th)

Aspera Managed File Transfer

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

13th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 2.5%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Aspera Managed File Transfer is 2.6%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Managed File Transfer (MFT) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Aspera Managed File Transfer	2.6%
ActiveBatch by Redwood	2.5%
Other	94.9%

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

Featured Reviews

Abdul_Samad

Application Administrator Lead at Bluestem

Manages thousands of jobs daily and reduces downtime through secondary node support

The current feedback I receive from my end users regarding ActiveBatch by Redwood highlights issues with the tabs or panes during job modification. When the next user monitors it, they need to close the pane or job and reopen it to see the changes reflected. If the end user makes an update, it will not be visible unless they start from the beginning again. Implementing a refresh button would be helpful for real-time updates when the end user needs to see changes immediately. We currently face issues with the web console of ActiveBatch by Redwood. When users operate through an RDP session, every user has their own ActiveBatch by Redwood application. However, on the web console, users encounter daily activity issues where the job instances do not appear or update correctly, and they cannot view the latest logs. This issue is only present on the web console, as the application itself works without any problems. ActiveBatch by Redwood can be improved by adding more features, as we are not currently handling cloud-based applications like S3 buckets and Azure. Connecting to these cloud platforms would be a helpful enhancement.

Read full review

Balamurugan Kumarasamy

Deputy General Manager Information Technology at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

Data transfer improvements with an easy setup and responsive support

There are other products of Aspera which come as add-ons, however, we haven't purchased those, like report generation, since that was not our requirement. The features we needed were included in the basic edition, and that works for us. If there is any failure in the data transfer and it can automatically detect and reinitiate it, that would be great.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"ActiveBatch by Redwood has positively impacted my organization by efficiently managing a significant volume of data and workflow between our database and applications on the web browser."

"ActiveBatch helped us automate and schedule routine tasks such as data backups, file transfers, database updates, and report generation, which frees IT staff to focus on other studies."

"The best feature that ActiveBatch by Redwood offers is the user interface."

"The nice thing about ActiveBatch is once we have created a specific job that can be easily be replicated to another job, then minimal changes will have to be made. This makes things nice. Reduction of coding is substantial in a lot of cases. The replication of one job to another is just doing a few minor tweaks and rolling it into production. This decreases our development costs substantially."

"We leverage the solution's native integrations regularly. We have to get files from a remote server outside the organization, and even send things outside the organization. We use a lot of its file manipulation and SFTP functionality for contacting remote servers."

"It has helped with scheduling complex jobs with simple scripts."

"There are hundreds of pre-built steps."

"Using this tool, if there are any huge failures, we immediately get an email notification, and the proper team will be informed, at which time they can act accordingly."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood pros

"We were able to effectively nullify the China firewall since the China firewall was disrupting our data transfer."

"Good user interface and ability to set up multiple file transfer jobs."

"The main feature of Aspera Managed File Transfer is that it's an incredibly fast protocol, you can use all the bandwidth available. If I need to send large amounts of data this is the fastest protocol on the market. I have been using it for some minor projects and it is very powerful."

"We were able to effectively nullify the China firewall since the China firewall was disrupting our data transfer."

"Aspera Managed File Transfer is an optimal solution for customers who want to transfer large files to remote sites with lower bandwidth and in less time."

Cons

"ActiveBatch is a little complex."

"Except for the GUI, everything looks good."

"Whenever there is an overload, we are seeing crashes happening."

"We have faced a couple of issues where we were supposed to log a defect with ActiveBatch. That said, the Active batch Vendor Support is very responsive and reliable."

"Any product is going to have some room for improvement, no matter what. I see the company has already ventured into AWS and they're constantly trying to improve the managed file transfer which they have recently improvised. I think they bought a software called JSCAPE and they're trying to improve it, which is good. I am not sure if JSCAPE would be part of the base product but currently, you have to buy a separate license for it, which doesn't make sense. If it was Microsoft, ServiceNow, or integrating with other software vendors, I would understand but JSCAPE is now in-house and I'm not sure if they can justify having a separate license for JSCAPE. I would probably expect them to be packaging JSCAPE into the base product. They did switch over from a perpetual license model to a subscription model, which hurt the company a little bit. Nobody is offering the perpetual model anymore. As long as the transition is fair for both the companies, I think it should be fine and not burn us out."

"Some improvements can be made to the user interface."

"The documentation is very limited, and it can be improved."

"There are very few documents that provide us with detailed information on the troubleshooting of errors that occur during integration with the existing environment."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood cons

"If you want to do a file transfer between two countries, and one is not China, then you have other more affordable options."

"Aspera Managed File Transfer should be packaged into another solution. Explaining to customers you need to have multiple solutions from multiple vendors for their use cases can get complicated for them to understand."

"The solution's pricing is high and should be reduced."

"Deployment is complex and it was difficult to get support."

"If there is any failure in the data transfer and it can automatically detect and reinitiate it, that would be great."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."

"ActiveBatch is currently redesigning themselves. In the past, they were a low cost solution for automation. They had a nice tool that was very inexpensive. With their five-year plan, they will be more enhancement-driven, so they're trying to improve their software, customer service, and the way that their customers get information from them. In doing that, they're raising the price of their base system. They changed from one pricing model to another, which has caused some friction between ActiveBatch and us. We're working through that right now with them. That's one of the reasons why we're why we were evaluating other software packages."

"I don't think we've ever had a problem with the pricing or licensing. Even the maintenance fees are very much in line. They are not excessive. I think for the support that you get, you get a good value for your money. It's the best value on the market."

"It allows for lower operational overhead."

"Currently, we are paying approximately $7,000 yearly, which includes support."

"If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."

"I like ActiveBatch Workload Automation's licensing model because they're not holding you down on an agentless model or agent model, where every server needs to have an agent. That's the main selling point of the solution and I hope they stay that way."

"The pricing was fair. There are additional costs for the plugins. We have the standard licensing fees for different pieces, then we have the plugins which were add-ons. However, we expected that."

"It was close to $10,000 to $20,000."

"Aspera Managed File Transfer is not an inexpensive solution. I am not aware of many competitors to determine how affordable the price is overall."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

20%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Insurance Company

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	47

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ActiveBatch by Redwood has been great; we recently renewed our license, and it was a smooth process without any issues.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

My main use case for ActiveBatch by Redwood is file processing. I use ActiveBatch by Redwood for file processing for debit card transactions.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Aspera Managed File Transfer?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Aspera Managed File Transfer?

We have an office in China, and we wanted to transfer data from China to the UK. We have an office in the UK as well.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Aspera Managed File Transfer?

For our requirements, IBM Aspera fit very well into the budget. It's subjective. I'd rate it nine out of ten. If you want to do a file transfer between two countries, and one is not China, then you...

See all answers

Comparisons

Control-M vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 12% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 11% of the time

Stonebranch vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 10% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 8% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 7% of the time

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Competitors

IBM Sterling File Gateway vs Aspera Managed File Transfer

Compared 32% of the time

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs Aspera Managed File Transfer

Compared 11% of the time

webMethods.io vs Aspera Managed File Transfer

Compared 11% of the time

JSCAPE by Redwood vs Aspera Managed File Transfer

Compared 10% of the time

Kiteworks vs Aspera Managed File Transfer

Compared 9% of the time

More Aspera Managed File Transfer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood

January 2026

Download ActiveBatch by Redwood product report

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

December 2025

Download Aspera Managed File Transfer product report

Also Known As

ActiveBatch

No data available

Overview

ActiveBatch by Redwood enhances efficiency with features like job scheduling, integration, and real-time monitoring. It supports diverse platforms, automates tasks, and offers a single-pane view with robust security.

ActiveBatch streamlines automation by offering drag-and-drop functionality, pre-built job steps, and native integrations. Its customizable workflows and alert system aid in managing complex workloads like data processing and server monitoring across hybrid environments. While it effectively reduces manual errors and enhances productivity, areas like navigation and support for cloud platforms need enhancement. New users may face challenges due to its complexity and steep learning curve, and further improvements in reporting, mobile access, and training could provide additional support to users.

What important features does ActiveBatch offer?

Comprehensive Job Scheduling: Manages and automates complex workloads efficiently.
Integration Capabilities: Seamlessly connects with different platforms and applications.
Real-time Monitoring: Offers a single-pane view for quick issue identification.
Customizable Workflows: Tailors processes to specific organizational tasks.
Robust Alert System: Ensures timely notifications for critical events.
Data Protection: Incorporates strong security measures for secure operations.

What benefits should be considered when evaluating ActiveBatch?

Enhanced Efficiency: Automates repetitive tasks, reducing manual intervention.
Improved Productivity: Streamlines processes across hybrid environments.
Error Reduction: Decreases likelihood of manual errors.
Platform Support: Provides integration with diverse systems.

In finance, ActiveBatch is implemented for orchestrating batch processes and data management. The healthcare industry utilizes it for automating patient data updates and server monitoring, while the retail sector benefits from file transfers and inventory management automation.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

IBM Aspera takes a different approach to tackling the challenges of big data movement over global WANs. Rather than optimize or accelerate data transfer, Aspera eliminates underlying bottlenecks by using its proprietary fasp technology that fully utilizes available network bandwidth to maximize speed and quickly scale up with no theoretical limit. Using fasp, transfers are secure end-to-end and are largely unaffected by file size, transfer distance, or network conditions, making transfer times up to 100Xs faster than TCP-based protocols.

IBM Aspera offers SaaS, on-prem, and hybrid solutions to meet the needs of modernizing infrastructures. All solutions offer robust security and compliance, intuitive file sharing, workflow automation, central administration, and real-time visibility. Quickly and easily initiate transfers across hybrid infrastructures, including support for cloud-to-cloud transfers. IBM Aspera offers unmatched transfer speeds, end-to-end security, reliability, and exceptional bandwidth control.

IBM

Sample Customers

Informatica, D&H, ACES, PrimeSource, Sub-Zero Group, SThree, Lamar Advertising, Subway, Xcel Energy, Ignite Technologies, Whataburger, Jyske Bank, Omaha Children's Hospital

Gwinnett County Public Schools, Evonik, Voith, BITMARCK, Oracle

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Aspera Managed File Transfer

December 2025

Free Report: ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Aspera Managed File Transfer

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Aspera Managed File Transfer and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Aspera Managed File Transfer report.

See our list of best Managed File Transfer (MFT) vendors.

We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.