Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Aspera Managed File Transfer vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

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

Aspera Managed File Transfer
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
13th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Control-M
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
150
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (2nd), Workload Automation (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Aspera Managed File Transfer is 2.6%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 4.2%, down from 4.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Control-M4.2%
Aspera Managed File Transfer2.6%
Other93.2%
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

BK
Deputy General Manager Information Technology at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Data transfer improvements with an easy setup and responsive support
There are other products of Aspera which come as add-ons, however, we haven't purchased those, like report generation, since that was not our requirement. The features we needed were included in the basic edition, and that works for us. If there is any failure in the data transfer and it can automatically detect and reinitiate it, that would be great.
RP
Batch Admin at NBC Universal
Brings data together from multiple platforms and optimizes cross-environment orchestration
The features of Control-M that I like the most include the ability to easily integrate or bring in different platforms into Control-M. For instance, AWS, mainframe, TWS, and something that's running on Autosys can all be brought into Control-M, converted to how Control-M runs it, and then the batch can be executed. This centralizes various applications in Control-M, which doesn't just have to handle batch processes, but also other tasks like reporting on required data. I find this functionality very useful and the setup is impressive, with more advancements yet to come. With Control-M, my company has achieved several measurable improvements since I started. The metrics indicate that the number of failures has dropped, and we have addressed the issue of excessive false alerts that I encountered when I joined. Previously, we received an overwhelming number of alerts daily, but now we manage to maintain that at a normalized level, perhaps around five to fifteen alerts, depending on running core batches and their setup.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The main feature of Aspera Managed File Transfer is that it's an incredibly fast protocol, you can use all the bandwidth available. If I need to send large amounts of data this is the fastest protocol on the market. I have been using it for some minor projects and it is very powerful."
"Aspera Managed File Transfer is an optimal solution for customers who want to transfer large files to remote sites with lower bandwidth and in less time."
"We were able to effectively nullify the China firewall since the China firewall was disrupting our data transfer."
"Good user interface and ability to set up multiple file transfer jobs."
"We were able to effectively nullify the China firewall since the China firewall was disrupting our data transfer."
"Self Service, BIM features are most valuable. As no need to login to EM client and check the job status."
"Control-M has enabled true enterprise batch automation, which combined with the other BMC Control products on our mainframe platform, allows us to run a 24/7 site with the lights out."
"We used Control-M's Python Client and cloud data service integrations with AWS and, as a feature, it was very customizable. It gave us a lot of flexibility for customizing whatever data maneuver we wanted to do within a pipeline."
"Control-M has helped us resolve issues 70% to 80% faster. It provides us with alerts instead of having someone go to that particular server and check the logs to determine where the issue is. We can simply click on the alert information, then everything is in front of us. This provides us with time savings, human effort savings, and process savings."
"The measurable benefits my company has achieved with Control-M include improved SLA and reduced errors, as manual batch job runs lead to numerous errors and failure to meet the SLA."
"We are now able to deliver data to our data warehouses and dashboards promptly."
"The best feature of Control-M is its orchestration capabilities for any orchestration that's required. Control-M has positively impacted my organization by helping with orchestrating complex tasks."
"Its compatibility with the new technologies and platforms, like the Google Cloud or Amazon, is the most valuable. Its console allows us to view the duration and execution of a process. It is also very easy to use and easy to implement."
 

Cons

"If there is any failure in the data transfer and it can automatically detect and reinitiate it, that would be great."
"If you want to do a file transfer between two countries, and one is not China, then you have other more affordable options."
"Deployment is complex and it was difficult to get support."
"Aspera Managed File Transfer should be packaged into another solution. Explaining to customers you need to have multiple solutions from multiple vendors for their use cases can get complicated for them to understand."
"The solution's pricing is high and should be reduced."
"There is no superiority when compared with other products. All products provide the same functionality."
"The infrastructure could be improved."
"Pricing and licensing for Control-M are challenging aspects."
"The history module only contains a maximum of 10 days, but we would like to have access to more. For example, it would be helpful to have 30 days or two months of history available."
"Sometimes, with technical support, they will take feedback, but you don't know where that feedback goes or if it proceeds along in the thought process."
"I would like to see more auditing capabilities. Right now, it has the basics and I've been trying to set those up to work with what our auditors are looking for."
"With earlier versions, the support was not accurate or delivered in a timely manner. What would happen is that I would be in production mode and I would have an issue and would want to get someone on a call to see what was happening. But they would always say, “Hey, provide the log first and then we'll review and we'll get back to you." I feel that when a customer asks about a production issue, they should jump onto the call to see what is going on, and then collect the logs."
"They should have a proper integration method that clearly defines the workflow."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It was close to $10,000 to $20,000."
"Aspera Managed File Transfer is not an inexpensive solution. I am not aware of many competitors to determine how affordable the price is overall."
"Its pricing is a little bit high. They could provide an enterprise-level license for an unlimited number of jobs. Currently, it is based on the number of jobs, and if you exceed the number of jobs, there are charges. For example, if your license is for 3,000 jobs per day, but you run 3,050 jobs, you will have to pay for the extra 50 jobs. They charge $120 per job. So, it is too costly."
"The annual licensing within BMC Control-M is on a per task basis. Three- and five-year contracts are also offered. The customer usually buys a bundle of tasks, e.g., 5,000 tasks, then my team configures Control-M for their usage."
"This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manually operations."
"The price is right because of the licensing schema, which is based on nodes and processes. You purchase what you use, no more and no less, and you can grow with time."
"Cost-wise, it is good."
"The license model is based on the number of jobs we run on the SaaS application or the number of executions, unlike the on-premise model options. If we have a handful of jobs, it's always good to consider Control-M, but if it's a large number of jobs, Control-M might not be a great option."
"Its cost can be more competitive. One of the main things customers look at is the cost. It's not affordable. The cost is very high, according to my customers."
"Its pricing and licensing could be a little bit better. Based on my experience and discussions with other existing customers, everybody feels that the regular Managed File Transfer piece, not the enterprise one, is a little overpriced, especially for folks who already have licensed Advanced File Transfer. We understand that Advanced File Transfer is going away and is going to be the end of life, and there is some additional functionality built into MFT, but the additional functionality does not really correlate with the huge price increase over what we're paying for AFT already. This has actually driven a lot of people to look for alternative solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business30
Midsize Enterprise15
Large Enterprise123
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Aspera Managed File Transfer?
There are other products of Aspera which come as add-ons, however, we haven't purchased those, like report generation, since that was not our requirement. The features we needed were included in th...
What is your primary use case for Aspera Managed File Transfer?
We have an office in China, and we wanted to transfer data from China to the UK. We have an office in the UK as well.
What advice do you have for others considering Aspera Managed File Transfer?
For our requirements, IBM Aspera fit very well into the budget. It's subjective. I'd rate it nine out of ten. If you want to do a file transfer between two countries, and one is not China, then you...
How does Control-M compare with AutoSys Workload Automation?
Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and th...
What do you like most about Control-M?
First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
From what I know about pricing, I would probably put Control-M in the expensive category, but you do pay for what you get; you are paying for a premium product.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Control M
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Gwinnett County Public Schools, Evonik, Voith, BITMARCK, Oracle
The Bank of East Asia, LINE Bank Taiwan, Coop, Air Europa, Carrefour, Itau Unibanco, Snam, Embraer, ANZ Bank, EDP, Dominio's, Tampa General Hospital, W&W Informatik GmbH, Veterans General, Up Sí Vale, Sky Italia, REWE digital GmbH, Raymond James, Railinc, Navistar, Management Science Associates, Colruyt, CARFAX, Banpara, Aspiag Service, Amadeus, AG Insurance, ING Bank Slaski
Find out what your peers are saying about Aspera Managed File Transfer vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,768 professionals have used our research since 2012.