No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs JSCAPE by Redwood comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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
37
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (26th), Workload Automation (14th)
JSCAPE by Redwood
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
13th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 2.3%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JSCAPE by Redwood is 3.9%, up from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
JSCAPE by Redwood3.9%
ActiveBatch by Redwood2.3%
Other93.8%
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

AS
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.
Akshatha Ramesh - PeerSpot reviewer
Junior Business Analyst at EFI
Good automation, no complex coding, and high-level data encryption
When it comes to performance and scalability, JSCAPE is a highly reliable software, however, I would suggest a few improvements: 1. The documentation needs a revamp for a better understanding of the features of the tool. 2. Customer service can be offered on call or chat. 3. The initial setup is time-consuming; it could use a video tutorial. 4. UI can be improved in terms of look and feel. 5. Documentation should be provided for a majority of newly released features as these can be difficult for a layman to use without proper instructions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best feature that ActiveBatch by Redwood offers is the user interface."
"The breakthrough for us was when we were able to take completely different software tools and integrate them into one long flow of data."
"I find this to be the easiest product that I have ever used, especially compared to Robot Schedule and CA AutoSys as well as an in-house scheduling software that I had designed and developed at one time."
"Easy to configure and simple to develop new features."
"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."
"As far as centralization goes it's nice because we can see all these processes that are tied to this larger process. The commissions, FTP processing, the reporting, the file moves to the business users — all that is right there. It's very easy to read. It's easy to tie it together, visually, and see where each of these steps fits into the bigger picture."
"It has improved our workflow completion rates by five hours per day, because we execute our workflows daily."
"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."
"The user-friendly interface has made it easy for fresh users to adopt it."
"The user interface feels easy to use."
"It helped in confidentially transferring files with a vast number of servers available with no external applications required."
"It is a reliable and easy-to-operate platform for secure file transfers."
"JSCAPE provides high-level data encryption, which can help us share confidential and time-sensitive data across our global partners without any hassle."
"It offers audit trails and reporting tools, allowing users to track file transfers, monitor user activities, and produce regulatory compliance reports."
"Triggers are also something that is useful as they automate the use of boilerplate code."
"The automation part of JSCAPE by Redwood is great because you can set up a scheduled delivery with files and be notified if the transfer was successful."
 

Cons

"I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized."
"As more organizations are moving towards a cloud-based infrastructure, ActiveBatch could incorporate more capabilities that support popular cloud platforms, such as AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud."
"They should offer pricing that is more affordable."
"Whenever there is an overload, we are seeing crashes happening."
"The only thing is that it does have a little bit of a learning curve because it is fairly complex."
"The interface is not that user-friendly and is a little tough to navigate."
"I can't get the cleaning up of logs to work consistently. Right now, we are not setup correctly, and maybe it is something that I have not effectively communicated to them."
"I have faced struggles to understand, set up the tool, and implement it in my early days as a new user."
"The FTP/S and ad-hoc techniques can further be automated."
"JSCAPE ensures data integrity. You know that the file has been transferred and on which date, as we provide timestamps."
"The initial setup and configuration are time-consuming."
"The JSCAPE team could create detailed documents or blogs on how to troubleshoot certain errors that come over in integration with existing environment tools."
"The initial setup is a bit hectic during the installation."
"The cost of the tool is relatively high and can pose a problem to medium and small-scale companies who are trying to overcome their on-premise server limitations."
"The product's pricing needs improvement."
"The GUI has to be enhanced."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."
"The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"It allows for lower operational overhead."
"The software is expensive compared to other vendors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Construction Company
7%
Performing Arts
7%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Performing Arts
7%
Financial Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise35
 

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.
What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?
I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized.
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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JSCAPE?
I rate the product’s pricing a three out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.
What needs improvement with JSCAPE?
JSCAPE ensures data integrity. You know that the file has been transferred and on which date, as we provide timestamps. We handle cybersecurity ourselves with proprietary technologies for the netwo...
What is your primary use case for JSCAPE?
We selected JSCAPE because they have a viable product for our network service delivery. In the medical profession, people need to move files around within the industry. In manufacturing, a lot of d...
 

Also Known As

ActiveBatch
No data available
 

Overview

 

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
BAE Systems, ABN AMRO, Boeing, Bank of America, Dassault Falcon Jet Corp, Bank of Montreal, General Dynamics, Bank of Taiwan, General Electric, Citibank Canada, Honeywell, CreditSuisse, L-3 Communications, Columbia University, Harvard Medical School, Kaplan Higher Education, Northwest Christian College, Kaiser Permanente, Share Builder, Procter & Gamble, TransUnion, Roche Diagnostics, BASF, 1-800-Contacts, Canon, AMPM, Daimler AG, Coach, Edwards Brothers, USB Financial Services
Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. JSCAPE by Redwood and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.