ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Kiteworks comparison

ActiveBatch by Redwood and Kiteworks are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked #10 with an average rating of 9.4, while Kiteworks is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.0. ActiveBatch by Redwood holds a 2.1% mindshare in MFT, compared to Kiteworks’s 9.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of ActiveBatch by Redwood users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Kiteworks users who would recommend it.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Read 35 ActiveBatch by Redwood reviews

2,093 Views
691 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Kiteworks

Read 13 Kiteworks reviews

2,789 Views
1,952 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Kiteworks

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Kiteworks and ActiveBatch by Redwood are competitive in the tech space, focusing on secure file sharing and automation. Kiteworks may be more appealing to organizations prioritizing security and cost-effectiveness, while ActiveBatch is favored for its advanced automation capabilities and perceived long-term value.

Features: Kiteworks prioritizes secure file sharing with strong encryption, seamless integration, and manageable file transfer capacities. ActiveBatch offers comprehensive automation, easy job scheduling, and robust integration features, including API and job execution management.

Room for Improvement: Kiteworks could enhance mobile access, supported file formats, and improve its user administration interface. ActiveBatch may benefit from simplifying its complex customization processes, expanding native integration options, and offering more intuitive UI enhancements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiteworks features easy deployment with a focus on secure communication, catering to businesses seeking security-centered environments. ActiveBatch provides extensive support, ensuring smooth implementation and management despite its complexity.

Pricing and ROI: Kiteworks is priced competitively, offering immediate ROI for organizations needing straightforward secure file sharing. ActiveBatch justifies a higher initial investment with significant ROI derived from its extensive automation capacities, enhancing long-term efficiency across IT operations.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Kiteworks Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Kiteworks

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 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)

10th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (9th), Workload Automation (9th)

Kiteworks

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

6th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Content Management (15th), Email Security (33rd), Content Collaboration Platforms (14th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (12th)

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 2.1%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiteworks is 9.6%, up from 6.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

Featured Reviews

Shubham Bharti

Senior Analyst at Capgemini

Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation

Occasionally, I find myself contemplating if there is room for improvement in the user interface (UI), and envisioning that with certain enhancements. The UI could potentially offer a more refined and user-friendly experience, fostering smoother interactions and facilitating easier navigation for users engaging with the application. New users might encounter a minor setback due to the absence of readily accessible training videos, which could have otherwise proven to be an invaluable resource in aiding their initial familiarization with the platform, potentially hindering their seamless onboarding process and delaying their ability to harness the software's full range of capabilities to its utmost potential.

Read full review

Sukkanta Banerjee

Senior Software Engineer at Wipro Limited

Two-factor authentication and .ZIP format make large file transfers very secure

The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth. Also, only the .ZIP format is supported because it is a very secure mode of file transfer, and that is why it is recommended. It also has built-in antivirus, so if it detects any malware it will quarantine the file and it won't be delivered. This is really important to keep the service up and running in a proper and secure manner. With people working from home, the data needs to be checked to see what kind of data is being sent. It has a two-factor authentication mechanism. For example, if a person with a particular domain is using Kiteworks and sends a file to a party outside of his domain, that external party has to go through two-factor authentication. The receiver gets a link that takes them to the setup of a temporary account, which will be valid for three days. The recipient will also receive a customized password separately. Only after all these steps will they be able to access the file. That access is only available to a person with the mail ID to which the file was sent. In addition, admins can see who is sending sensitive content, what that content is, and to whom it is being sent, and can track emails. One week of good training will give a user complete knowledge for using the solution. The system is very easy to use. You just click on "Compose," attach a file, and send it. It's very easy compared to Outlook or Teams. It's quite simple, even for someone logging in for the first time. It is very smooth and easy to send files.

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

"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 most valuable feature is its stability. We've only had very minor issues and generally they have happened because someone has applied a patch on a Windows operating system and it has caused some grief. We've actually been able to resolve those issues quite quickly with ActiveBatch. In all the time that I've had use of ActiveBatch, it hasn't failed completely once. Uptime is almost 100 percent."

"We are able to integrate it into multiple third-party tools like email, backup, tracking systems, SharePoint, Slack alerts, etc."

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

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

"The Jobs Library has been a tremendous asset. For the most, that's what we use. There are some outliers, but we pretty much integrate those Jobs Library steps throughout the process, whether it's REST calls, FTP processes, or file copies and moves... That has helped us to build end-to-end workflows."

"The product offers a centralized platform for managing activities across many environments, applications, etc."

"One of the most valuable features is the job templates. If we need to create an FTP job, we just drag over the FTP template and fill out the requirements using the variables that ActiveBatch uses. And that makes it reusable. We can create a job once but use it for many different clients."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood pros

"Scalability is impressive."

"The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty."

"The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files."

"We can see when people are sending things. We can definitely see who is sending to whom. From the administrative logs, we can see who is sending to an outside entity, and those logs are retained for quite a while."

"The solution removes the limitations with file attachment size that is found with regular email."

"The top two features are the two-factor authentication, which is pretty good. It's easily understood by the users. And their API is rather robust. We have numerous integrations that work off the API."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow end-users to manage their own information and data with minimal administration. That's the best feature from my perspective."

More Kiteworks pros

Cons

"The monitoring dashboard could have been more user-friendly so that in the monitoring dashboard itself we can see the total number of jobs created in the system and how many were currently active/scheduled/chained."

"Between version 10 and version 12 there was a change. In version 10, they had each object in its own folder. But on the back end, they saw it at the root level. So when we moved over to version 12, everything was in the same area mixed together. It was incredibly difficult and we actually had to create our own folders and move those objects—like schedules, jobs, user accounts—and manually put those into folders, whereas the previous version already had 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."

"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."

"The interface is not that user-friendly and is a little tough to navigate."

"They have some crucial design flaws within the console that still need to be worked out because it is not working exactly how we hoped to see it, e.g., just some minor things where when you hit the save button, then all of a sudden all your job's library items collapse. Then, in order to continue on with your testing, you have to open those back up. I have taken that to them, and they are like, "Yep. We know about it. We know we have some enhancements that need to be taken care of. We have more developers now." They are working towards taking the minor things that annoy us, resolving them, and getting them fixed."

"An area for improvement in ActiveBatch Workload Automation is its interface or GUI. It could be a little better. There isn't any additional feature I'd like to see in the tool, except for the GUI, everything looks good."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood cons

"I would like to see immediate releases of fixes because now it takes at least a week. If that time span can be reduced to one day or two days, that would be very helpful for users so that things are sorted and transactions work smoothly."

"I noticed the Kiteworks login UI is very basic, lacking customization. Allowing more HTML tags to add hyperlinks or user-friendly information on the home page would be very useful."

"There is no offboarding process for end-users in Kiteworks. It's a manual process. There is no automated syncing with LDAP and checking to see if the account is still active. It's a manual process to get people out of here, which isn't the best way."

"Kiteworks could benefit from enhancing the proposal knowledge base section, specifically regarding the type of work involved. Currently, the knowledge base seems insufficiently dedicated to this topic, making it challenging for new users to access the relevant administrative law. Improving the visual aids and providing clearer explanations could alleviate this issue."

"It could be more stable. In the next release, it would be better if it was more stable with improved performance."

"File location could be improved."

"It would be nice if Kiteworks could provide a free version of the platform so that it could be used for a certain number of file transfers. We could be charged a fee if we exceeded the number of allotted file transfers."

"The one feature, which I have also requested directly to Kiteworks, is to have a scheduled upgrade function. Currently, one of my engineers logs in after hours for the upgrade. We're a hospital, and we're 24/7, but the primary users are seven to five. So, we log in the early evening just to push a button to tell it to do the update. It would be nice if that could be very easily scheduled."

More Kiteworks cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

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

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

"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."

"The price of Kiteworks is reasonable."

"It is not really expensive. I mean, to me it's obviously expensive, but it's worth it."

"They changed it midstream. We were being charged a certain flat rate for SFTP traffic. For whatever reason, at the beginning of the year, our pricing changed, and we are now being charged more for using a feature of the product than we were when we first bought it. That has been our experience with billing. It turned out to be more expensive than when we started with it."

"The solution is very expensive because we are buying with Malaysian Ringgit and it's sold in US dollars."

"The license management is changing and confusing. If I could make one change to it, it would be better license management through the API."

"I believe it's a little costly, but given the faith that we put into it from a security perspective to maintain the integrity of our patient information that is being transferred through this system, that's a small price to pay. So, on the surface, it might look like a lot of money, but depending on the need for security, which is where we feel it shines, it's okay price-wise."

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

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Government

16%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

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.

See all answers

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

I'd advise users to start by knowing what the actual requirement is and thoroughly assess the automation needs. New users should take advantage of the demos and trial versions so they get an idea o...

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

After upgrades we are facing a few issues and errors triggered, so focusing on this would be appreciated. Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referrin...

See all answers

What is Kiteworks?

Kiteworks is a secured file sharing platform that enables users to collaborate with different parties across a robust offering of secured protected channels. Users have the option of virtual privat...

See all answers

What do you like most about Kiteworks?

The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Kiteworks?

I'm not a network expert, however, there must be some room for improvement. Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss. If users receive such notifi...

See all answers

Comparisons

Control-M vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 17% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 14% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 10% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 9% of the time

Stonebranch vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 9% of the time

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Competitors

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs Kiteworks

Compared 34% of the time

SharePoint vs Kiteworks

Compared 10% of the time

GoAnywhere MFT vs Kiteworks

Compared 8% of the time

FileCloud vs Kiteworks

Compared 7% of the time

Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense vs Kiteworks

Compared 6% of the time

More Kiteworks Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood

August 2025

Download ActiveBatch by Redwood product report

Buyer's Guide

Kiteworks

August 2025

Download Kiteworks product report

Also Known As

ActiveBatch

Accellion

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

Kiteworks empowers organizations to effectively manage risk in every send, share, receive, and save of sensitive content over numerous communications channels: email, file sharing, managed file transfer, APIs, and web forms. The Kiteworks platform unifies, tracks, controls, and secures sensitive content moving within, into, and out of an organization, significantly improving risk management and ensuring regulatory compliance.

Kiteworks

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

United States Securities and Exchange Commission, National Health Service, Husch Blackwell LLP, NYC Health + Hospitals, Viatris, MITRE Corporation, Chubb, Kraft Heinz, KPMG, Kohler, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Purdue Pharma, AVL

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Kiteworks

July 2025

Free Report: ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Kiteworks

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Kiteworks and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Kiteworks 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.