AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] vs ActiveBatch by Redwood comparison

ActiveBatch by Redwood and Amazon Web Services (AWS) are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. Additionally, 100% of ActiveBatch by Redwood users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 75% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users who would recommend it.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Read 42 ActiveBatch by Redwood reviews

5,093 Views
1,579 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Read 3 AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] reviews

75% willing to recommend

ActiveBatch by Redwood

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] and ActiveBatch by Redwood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT).

To learn more, read our detailed Managed File Transfer (MFT) Report (Updated: July 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

July 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 908,800 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

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (12th), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (10th), Workload Automation (8th)

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Featured Reviews

Sai

Ai/Data Analyst at CSD

Automation has streamlined complex data workflows and now saves time on recurring reporting

To improve ActiveBatch by Redwood, the UI could be more modern and intuitive, and another thing that comes to mind is that it can feel overwhelming when workflows become large and complex. Troubleshooting can take extra time when there are multiple dependencies, jobs, and integrations running together. Better visualization of workflow relationships and easier debugging would really help. I would also appreciate seeing more simplified onboarding and documentation for newer users, as there is a learning curve at the beginning. Another improvement area could be smarter analytics or AI-driven recommendations, such as proactively identifying workflow bottlenecks, failed job patterns, or optimization suggestions instead of relying mostly on manual monitoring. From an operational perspective, faster configuration for integrations and cloud-based workflows would make implementation smoother, especially in environments working heavily with APIs and data pipelines. I have covered the main points regarding needed improvements. Overall, the platform is very capable and reliable for automation and workflow scheduling, especially in data-heavy environments. Most of the improvements I want are around making it easier for day-to-day use, such as a more intuitive UI, simpler troubleshooting for complex workflows, better onboarding for newer users, and more intelligent monitoring or optimization insights. The core functionality is strong, and the biggest opportunity is improving the overall user experience and simplifying operational management.

Read full review

Kyle Titus

Chief Technology Officer at Revio

Always works, handles all types of load, and allows us to have S3 files as storage

Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops. There could be client software that you use to connect to the server. Generally, AWS doesn't provide one for you, so you have to use either your CLI, maybe your SSH CLI, or use some kind of desktop solution. I had to find a desktop app from a third party to run this. Our clients also do the same everywhere else, so it would be nice if the SFTP Gateway solution came with a client that anyone could download on their Mac, Windows, or any other machine.

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 provides summary reports and logs for further analysis and improvements in monitoring servers, which is very handy."

"From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good."

"ActiveBatch by Redwood has positively impacted our organization because we are able to process files very effectively."

"ActiveBatch has reduced work by providing automated workflows across several different applications."

"Over the years that I have used this, it has probably saved us several hundred hours of development time for other teams and my own."

"Since I started using this product, I have been able to easily track everything as it mainly monitors, alerts, and looks after all the services - even across platform scheduling - which has helped me immensely."

"Managing the workload and monitoring the tasks were very difficult with manual interventions. Now, by using ActiveBatch, the process is automated and it runs tasks on a scheduled basis."

"It can connect to a number of third-party/legacy systems."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood pros

"The most valuable feature for us is data persistence, because it basically gives you a snapshot history and the solution also offers good data recovery."

"The solution offers good data recovery."

"The solution has helped with collaboration in our organization."

"Being able to have the S3 files as storage is most valuable. We can use S3 as storage instead of an SFTP server or a machine."

Cons

"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."

"One thing I've noticed is that navigation can be difficult unless you are familiar with the structure that we have in place. If someone else had to look at our ActiveBatch console and find a job, they might not know where to find it."

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

"I think ActiveBatch by Redwood can be improved by providing a tutorial during the process or smart help, as sometimes it is not so intuitive to use."

"A nice thing to have would be the ability to comfortably pass variables from one job to another. That was one of the things that I found difficult."

"They should offer pricing that is more affordable."

"The product should be improved by providing a customization option."

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

More ActiveBatch by Redwood cons

"The tool's UI should be pretty easy and straightforward. I would also like to see a simple audit report of the SFTP guest account that shows the amount of data transfers and security kind enabled."

"SFTP would be better if it was more automated, particularly for file transfers."

"Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"It's $249 per month per instance. It's not great; it's pretty pricey. We've got multiple users on that one instance. If we had to build it by hand, we would win on cost there, but obviously, there is effort and time. In terms of the additional costs, they do have some specific pricing, but for our use case, we don't end up going over $249. They do specify in their pricing what they're charging for."

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

908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Construction Company

10%

Outsourcing Company

Manufacturing Company

Performing Arts

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	12
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	52

No data available

Questions from the Community

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

I was not directly involved in the pricing, setup cost, and licensing decisions for ActiveBatch by Redwood, so my experience is from the user and workflow side rather than procurement. However, bas...

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved with a more modern and intuitive user interface, faster performance for very large workflows, and expanded built-in integrations with newer cloud and DevOps...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

My main use case for ActiveBatch by Redwood is enterprise workload automation, job scheduling, and orchestrating business processes across applications, servers, and cloud environments. For example...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Control-M vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 11% of the time

VisualCron vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 9% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 5% of the time

Stonebranch vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 5% of the time

Camunda vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 5% of the time

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Competitors

Kiteworks vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 22% of the time

Control-M vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 11% of the time

SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 9% of the time

GoAnywhere MFT vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 9% of the time

CA XCOM Data Transport vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood

August 2026

Download ActiveBatch by Redwood product report

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

July 2026

Download AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] 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

AWS Transfer for SFTP is a fully managed service that enables the transfer of files directly into and out of Amazon S3 using the Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP)—also known as Secure Shell (SSH) File Transfer Protocol.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

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

Myriota, FINRA, Celgene, Kontor New Media, Belong, ThinkCX, BluTV

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

July 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: July 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

908,800 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.