We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch by Redwood and BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We use the main job-scheduling feature. It's the only thing we use in the tool. That's the reason we are using the tool: to reduce costs by replacing manual tasks with automated tasks and to perform regular, repetitive tasks in a more reliable way."
"ActiveBatch has reduced work by providing automated workflows across several different applications."
"Easy to configure and simple to develop new features."
"The user interface is really incredible."
"The automation feature is a very valuable feature as the associates do not have to worry about performing repetitive tasks (i.e. endpoint security scans on a daily basis) that would take several hours to complete on a daily basis."
"There are hundreds of pre-built steps."
"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."
"By implementing a sophisticated scheduling mechanism, the system allows for the precise triggering of jobs at user-selected frequencies, enabling a seamless and automated execution of tasks according to specified time intervals."
"Dashboard and recovery are the features I found most valuable in the solution."
"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is highly stable. It is enterprise-grade software. Doing a job of 10,000 to 20,000 the solution is very stable."
"The file transfer, database, and integration features are the most valuable."
"It is a highly scalable solution...I rate the product's initial setup a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."
"The solution supports all file transfers."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable thing is that it works as advertised. We don't take advantage of some of the features like we should because that's not our primary role and responsibility in the environment that we manage. We only want to make sure that a file gets to where it was supposed to go, or we pull in a file and it comes to us correctly."
"There's another feature called Workload Archiving, where the data for all the jobs can be stored for however many days that we want, which is very useful for any historical analytics."
"ActiveBatch is a little complex."
"A cloud option is not provided as a free feature, making it a costly solution for smaller organizations."
"Providing some detailed training materials could be very helpful for new users who have very limited technical information about the tool."
"I have faced struggles to understand, set up the tool, and implement it in my early days as a new user."
"The user interface can be improved so that it is more appealing and accessible to new users."
"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."
"There are some issues with this version and finding the jobs that it ran. If you're looking at 1,000 different jobs, it shows based on the execution time, not necessarily the run time. So, if there was a constraint waiting, you may be looking for it in the wrong time frame. Plus, with thousands of jobs showing up and the way it pages output jobs, sometimes you end up with multiple pages on the screen, then you have to go through to find the specific job you're looking for. On the opposite side, you can limit the daily activity screen to show only jobs that failed or jobs currently running, which will shrink that back down. However, we have operators who are looking at the whole nightly cycle to make sure everything is there and make sure nothing got blocked or was waiting. Sometimes, they have a hard time finding every item within the list."
"It does have a little bit of a learning curve because it is fairly complex. You have to learn how it does things. I don't know if it's any worse than any other tool would be, just because of the nature of what it does... the learning curve is the hardest part."
"We have some issues on the SAP side of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer...So, there are some stability issues when it comes to SAP side."
"I believe that the API should be upgraded with security control from the DM. There is Currently no security for the app API solution."
"I'd like to see MFT included as part of the overall product and not a cost add-on as AFT used to be included and they stopped supporting that and now have come up with MFT and you now have to pay for it separately."
"Its current functionalities can be upgraded."
"We'd like it to be easier to maintain the administrative side."
"An area for improvement in BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is integration. It should be compatible with more solutions. It should have integrations with newer applications as well."
"The solution should improve the out-of-the box conversion tool for migrations so the percentage result isn't so low."
"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer has a scheduler and what they do is capture the steps based on the script, and then they put it into the Control-M job, or task. Any system that has the script behind it the solution can do it."
More BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 5th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 35 reviews while BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is ranked 3rd in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 21 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer writes "Adaptable, useful file transfer, and has helpful technical support". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, IBM Workload Automation and VisualCron, whereas BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is most compared with MOVEit, IBM Sterling File Gateway, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer and Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. BMC Control-M 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.