IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

ActiveBatch Workload Automation vs webMethods ActiveTransfer comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Featured Review
Buyer's Guide
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
June 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, HelpSystems, Seeburger and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: June 2022.
610,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"In our bank, all new applications need to be implemented with Control-M. We try to look for the best way to establish communication between both products. One of the new features for us is Application Integrator. It is a very interesting feature because it lets us integrate with those applications that are not included in Control-M. By using Application Integrator, we can easily integrate new technologies. With the help of Application Integrator, we recently integrated with Blue Prism, which is a robotic product. We could integrate such processes into Control-M. Now, we are working with Ansible, and we are putting Ansible automated processes into Control-M.""BIM is helpful because we do not miss any SLAs, as we get to know the issue well in advance. It is the topmost service that has helped us provide better solutions for the business.""The most valuable features are the Advanced File Transfer and the manage file transfer. They make transferring files securely seamless. It's very easy to set up, get deployed, and have it transferred to and from vendors. As long as we can get our firewall rules implemented at a decent time, it's very easy and seamless to get important files transferred in a secure manner.""It is very stable. We hardly get calls in respect to issues on Control-M, particularly on version 9.0.19.""Our data transfers have improved using Control-M processes, e.g., our monthly batches. When we used to do things manually, like copying files and reports, we used to take three to four days to complete a batch. However, with the automated file transfers and report sharing, we have been able to complete a batch within two and a half days and our reports are on time to users. So, 30% to 40% of the execution time has been saved.""The scheduling and management were really good. Monitoring was also better. It had a good visual presentation. It showed me charts and all such things. It was really good on that side.""The solution has the power to reduce resources, which is good for business. It is constantly updated to remain compatible with new technologies such as Amazon, Azure, and Google Cloud. It's very easy to take advantage of the compatibilities.""The initial setup is straightforward."

More Control-M Pros →

"ActiveBatch's Self-Service Portal allows our business units to run and monitor their own workloads. They can simply run and review the logs, but they can't modify them. It increases their productivity because they are able to take care of things on their own. It saves us time from having to rerun the scripts, because the business units can just go ahead and log in and and rerun it themselves.""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.""One of the most valuable features of this solution is the versatility of the prebuilt jobs.""ActiveBatch can automate predictable, repeatable processes very well. There is no real trick to what ActiveBatch does. ActiveBatch does exactly what you would expect a scheduling piece of software to do. It does it in a timely manner and does it with very little outside interference and fanfare. It runs when it is supposed to, and I don't have to jump through a bunch of hoops to double check it.""Since we are no longer waiting for an operator to see that a job is finished, we have changed our daily cycle from running in eight hours down to about five. We had a third shift-operator retire and that position was never refilled.""From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good.""Easy to configure and simple to develop new features."

More ActiveBatch Workload Automation Pros →

"ActiveTransfer lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it. After that, we can remove the file to make sure that the reconciliation process is done. Sometimes we will zip and unzip the files, but if we have a GKB file, we often ignore it."

More webMethods ActiveTransfer Pros →

Cons
"Some of the documentation could use some improvement, however, it gets you from point A to point B pretty quickly to get the solution in place.""We develop software. More frequently, we are working with microservices and APIs, using our integration tool, MuleSoft. While Control-M is really a good tool to integrate with other tools, it is important for them to continue improving their microservices and API.""Some of the features are not available. We were about to deploy the REST API, but we had some challenges. We had to use a third-party application. So, it should be improved in terms of integrating REST API jobs. That was something that was lacking. The customer was not that happy in terms of getting the desired output. So, we had to use a third-party application called Hangfire. We would like to have more videos on REST API integration, and we would like to have easy integration with the Control-M application through the REST API.""In general, it is a very good product, and we are very happy with it. It meets all of our expectations.""We've also had a few database bugs within our organization. I think we are migrating to OpenJDK rather than just regular Java and that has since shown some issues with our Control-M instance, timing out and causing our jobs to stop running. We are still working with BMC to fine-tune that and get that resolved.""The report form and display function are weak; they are not very powerful.""I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product.""The stability could be improved. I ran into an issue with a recent Control-M patch. The environment would become unstable if security ports were scanned. This is an area they need to improve on, but ultimately it's a relatively small improvement."

More Control-M Cons →

"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.""The interface is not that user-friendly and is a little tough to navigate.""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.""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.""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.""The reporting needs improvement. There is a real need for the ability to generate audit reports on the fly. It needs to be a lot easier than what I can do right now. This is a major item for me.""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.""A cloud option is not provided as a free feature, making it a costly solution for smaller organizations."

More ActiveBatch Workload Automation Cons →

"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."

More webMethods ActiveTransfer Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."
  • "This is an area where it is a little difficult to work with BMC. They want to do licenses by job, which is what we have. For example, the simplest is to license by job, but they can also license by nodes. While the licensing is simple to use, it might not be the correct licensing model for the customer. It is okay because we want to license by job, which is something measurable. At the end of the day, licensing by job is the most important."
  • "The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."
  • "You're going to spend a lot of money upfront, but the benefits you're going to get out of it are going to quickly pay for it."
  • "Initially, our licensing model was based on the number of jobs per day. That caused some issues because we were restricted to a number. So at our renewal time we said, 'We want to convert from number of jobs to number of endpoints.' That cost us extra money but it gave us additional capabilities, without worrying about the number of jobs."
  • "BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."
  • "You must accept that BMC licensing can be very confusing. No one can easily understand how they calculate things, whether it is user-based, job-based, or server-based. The calculation is quite tough. How BMC calculates licensing is not easily available anywhere."
  • "There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."
  • More Control-M Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • "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 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."
  • "If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."
  • More ActiveBatch Workload Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
    610,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful… more »
    Top Answer:Hi! I don't know the "Oracle DAC Scheduler", but I can say that in most competitive solutions Control-m stands out in… more »
    Top Answer:As soon as you have an issue, a ticket is created and the tech support is quite responsive.
    Top Answer:One of the most valuable features of this solution is the versatility of the prebuilt jobs.
    Top Answer:I like ActiveBatch Workload Automation's licensing model because they're not holding you down on an agentless model or… more »
    Top Answer:Any product is going to have some room for improvement, no matter what. I see the company has already ventured into AWS… more »
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Control M
    ActiveBatch
    Learn More
    Overview

    Control-M simplifies application and data workflow orchestration on premises or as a service. It makes it easy to build, define, schedule, manage, and monitor production workflows, ensuring visibility, reliability, and improving SLAs.

    • Accelerate new business applications into production—by embedding workflow orchestration into your CI/CD pipeline
    • Scale Dev and Ops collaboration, with a Jobs-as-Code approach
    • Simplify workflows across hybrid and multi-cloud environments with AWS, Azure and Google Cloud Platform integrations
    • Deliver data-driven outcomes faster, managing big data workflows in a scalable way
    • Take control of your file transfer operations with integrated, intelligent file movement and visibility

    Orchestrate your entire tech stack with ActiveBatch Workload Automation and Enterprise Job Scheduling. Build and centralize end-to-end workflows under a single pane of glass. Seamlessly manage systems, applications, and services across your organization. Eliminate manual workflows with ActiveBatch so you can focus on higher value activities that drive your company forward.

    Limitless Endpoints: Use native integrations and our low-code REST API adapter to connect to any server, any application, any service.

    Proactive Support Model: 24/7- US-based support and predictive diagnostics.

    Low Code Drag-and-Drop GUI: Easily build reliable, customizable, end-to-end processes.

    WHY ACTIVETRANSFER FOR MFT?
    Imagine the simplicity of having a centralized console to easily manage partner files throughout your organization. That’s what you can do with webMethods ActiveTransfer for Managed File Transfer (MFT).

    Using this secure, reliable, centrally managed file transfer system, you can:

    -Exchange and schedule files of any size—even big data files—up to 25 times faster
    -Centrally manage file transfers, set up transfer schedules and configure users
    -Move large files quickly over long distances to increase partner response time
    -Securely exchange files with partners using the latest security and encryption techniques
    -Accelerate large file transfers by boosting performance 10 to 25 times, overcoming network
    latency and boosting productivity
    -Control transfer speeds and allocate necessary, network bandwidth to partners
    -Ensure acceptance of file transfers from approved IP addresses and assigned users
    -Schedule and create event-driven transfers
    -Trigger file transfers as the events occurs, such as completion of a batch job

    Offer
    Learn more about Control-M
    Learn more about ActiveBatch Workload Automation
    Learn more about webMethods ActiveTransfer
    Sample Customers
    CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
    Informatica, D&H, ACES, PrimeSource, Sub-Zero Group, SThree, Lamar Advertising, Subway, Xcel Energy, Ignite Technologies, Whataburger, Jyske Bank, Omaha Children's Hospital
    Information Not Available
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Retailer8%
    Healthcare Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company32%
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    Insurance Company8%
    REVIEWERS
    Insurance Company42%
    Financial Services Firm17%
    Leisure / Travel Company8%
    Pharma/Biotech Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company27%
    Financial Services Firm11%
    Comms Service Provider9%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise78%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise77%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise36%
    Large Enterprise43%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business21%
    Midsize Enterprise15%
    Large Enterprise64%
    No Data Available
    Buyer's Guide
    Managed File Transfer (MFT)
    June 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, HelpSystems, Seeburger and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: June 2022.
    610,336 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    ActiveBatch Workload Automation is ranked 5th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 8 reviews while webMethods ActiveTransfer is ranked 12th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 1 review. ActiveBatch Workload Automation is rated 8.8, while webMethods ActiveTransfer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch Workload Automation writes "Everything runs automatically from start to finish; we don't have to worry about somebody clicking the wrong button". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods ActiveTransfer writes "It lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it". ActiveBatch Workload Automation is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal Automation, VisualCron, Automic Workload Automation and ASG-Zena, whereas webMethods ActiveTransfer is most compared with .

    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.