AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] vs Control-M comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and BMC are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. Additionally, 75% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 98% of BMC users who would recommend it.

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Read 3 AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] reviews

75% willing to recommend

Control-M

Read 186 Control-M reviews

22,169 Views
3,325 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Control-M

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 13, 2026

Control-M and AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] are competing products in the secure file transfer market. AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] appears to have the upper hand due to its seamless integration with AWS services, while Control-M is preferred for its comprehensive scheduling and workflow automation.

Features: Control-M includes advanced scheduling, robust automation, and detailed monitoring, effectively supporting complex workflows. AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] provides secure transfers, simple operations, and elastic capabilities with seamless AWS ecosystem integration.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] offers effortless cloud deployment with straightforward AWS management interfaces and strong support. Control-M, typically on-premises, may require more extensive setup and ongoing support, making its process more intricate.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M generally involves higher setup costs but offers potential significant ROI in advanced capability environments. AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] uses a pay-as-you-go model, possibly providing faster ROI for AWS-invested businesses, with flexible pricing as a cost-effective alternative.

To learn more, read our detailed Managed File Transfer (MFT) Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 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

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Control-M

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

186

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (2nd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (1st)

Featured Reviews

Kyle Titus

Chief Technology Officer at Revio

Always works, handles all types of load, and allows us to have S3 files as storage

Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops. There could be client software that you use to connect to the server. Generally, AWS doesn't provide one for you, so you have to use either your CLI, maybe your SSH CLI, or use some kind of desktop solution. I had to find a desktop app from a third party to run this. Our clients also do the same everywhere else, so it would be nice if the SFTP Gateway solution came with a client that anyone could download on their Mac, Windows, or any other machine.

Read full review

Raj Pattni

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.

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

"The solution offers good data recovery."

"The solution has helped with collaboration in our organization."

"Being able to have the S3 files as storage is most valuable. We can use S3 as storage instead of an SFTP server or a machine."

"In Helix Control-M, we have the automation API that allows us to customize and do integrations easily in any script, such as Java or Python. It is all integrated within the integration API."

"Self Service for repeatable, low impact workload automation processes."

"Control-M can cross all platforms and offers integration for container and cloud solutions."

"If they have ad hoc requirements, then they can theoretically schedule their own file transfers with the Self Service. We are trying to push as much work back to the customers or developers that have that requirement, because they prefer to help themselves, if possible. We try empowering them and enabling them through Control-M, especially for file transfers, because it is a much broader base of the business then just with batch scheduling. Typically, with SAP batch scheduling, it would work with dedicated teams. With file transfers, the entire business is involved. There are business users, end users, etc. It definitely needs to be as simple as possible and as managed as well as possible. They need to manage it themselves, if possible, because our team is not growing but the number of customers, applications, and jobs are growing. We need to hand back some of the responsibility to the customer for them to resolve and action it."

"A large bank in South Africa would have more than one million jobs to be run each and every night. If something goes wrong in the middle of a million jobs, it can be very complicated if you're managing that via scripts or manually. Control-M solves that problem."

"The best features of Control-M include the fact that you can easily connect different platforms—for anybody coming to it, if you needed to script a solution that connected Windows and Unix and mainframe, that would be difficult, but with Control-M, you can just sit back and connect a COBOL program running on the mainframe, trigger something on the Windows platform, then do a file transfer on Linux, and that's all basically just drag and drop."

"Control-M processes about 10,000 jobs starting every day in our production environment, and adding new jobs is very simple."

"Automation of the batch jobs is the most valuable feature."

More Control-M pros

Cons

"Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops."

"Could be more automated, particularly for file transfers."

"The tool's UI should be pretty easy and straightforward. I would also like to see a simple audit report of the SFTP guest account that shows the amount of data transfers and security kind enabled."

"Before we transfer files we have to make the connection profile first for MFT. If we did not have to do this and send the transfer files directly, that would be useful."

"I believe that the API should be upgraded with security control from the DM. There is Currently no security for the app API solution."

"They can improve their interface."

"In my previous project, I experienced lagging with refresh times of six to seven seconds."

"The main area that could be improved would be documentation, just like every other software product out there!"

"There are eight different kinds of dashboards in Workflow Insights, but there could be more because there is third party software that provides more dashboard styles."

"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."

"The UI can be challenging for new users due to its learning curve."

More Control-M cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's $249 per month per instance. It's not great; it's pretty pricey. We've got multiple users on that one instance. If we had to build it by hand, we would win on cost there, but obviously, there is effort and time. In terms of the additional costs, they do have some specific pricing, but for our use case, we don't end up going over $249. They do specify in their pricing what they're charging for."

"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."

"The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."

"This is an expensive product compared to other solutions, although I think that it is a good one. We are in a good position with licensing, as we can run 10,000 jobs."

"Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more."

"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 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."

"This is now from my previous years as support for banks and big companies. If it's not enterprise scale, I find that it's too expensive for smaller companies. You really have to be quite big and need to have a dedicated support staff to run it, then you'll be fine. What we've seen at smaller companies, it's too expensive because they want to automate everything. Now, stuff that can literally run once a day for the rest of their lives is costing them $3 a job a day. It becomes too expensive, eventually. They are not seeing the return on investment because it's not business critical. Nobody is going to die or they're going to lose money if that job didn't run exactly at 11 minutes past 4:00. It's definitely for bigger enterprise companies, especially banks or healthcare providers. We have had an instance where Control-M was unavailable due to external factors for 20 minutes and there was a loss of almost a million euros because the solution involved logistics."

"Pricing varies depending on which components and modules you are using."

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

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

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

27%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	37
Midsize Enterprise	23
Large Enterprise	143

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

Kiteworks vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 72% of the time

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

MOVEit vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

IBM Sterling File Gateway vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Competitors

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 13% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

February 2026

Download Control-M product report

Also Known As

No data available

Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

BMC

Overview

AWS Transfer for SFTP is a fully managed service that enables the transfer of files directly into and out of Amazon S3 using the Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP)—also known as Secure Shell (SSH) File Transfer Protocol.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Control-M SaaS by BMC is tailored for growing teams, offering essential orchestration for managing hybrid cloud workflows starting at $29,000 annually.

Control-M integrates automation, orchestration, and a user-friendly interface to streamline workflows across banking, DevOps, and cloud environments. Key modules like Managed File Transfer and cross-platform support simplify job monitoring, while Batch Impact Manager enhances scheduling. Despite its capabilities, improvements in output analysis, reporting customization, offline access, and API integration are desired by users.

What are Control-M's key features?

Automation and Orchestration: Simplifies workflow management.
Integration: Connects with diverse applications seamlessly.
User Interface: Facilitates easy navigation.
Managed File Transfer: Streamlines secure file movements.
Self-Service: Empowers users to independently manage tasks.
Cross-Platform Support: Handles complex workflows efficiently.
Batch Impact Manager: Enhances scheduling and SLA management.
API Integration: Extends versatility across environments.

What benefits and ROI can users expect?

Increased Efficiency: Optimizes operations through automation.
Scalability: Supports enterprise growth and workload demands.
Improved SLA Management: Enhances reliability in scheduling.
Cost Savings: Streamlines processes to reduce operational costs.
Process Optimization: Ensures secure and efficient data exchanges.

Control-M is implemented in industries such as finance and enterprise operations, aiding in automating batch processing across platforms like SAP and Teradata. It integrates with secure file transfers, ERP systems, and databases, whether deployed on-premises or cloud, ensuring seamless operation optimization.

BMC

Sample Customers

Myriota, FINRA, Celgene, Kontor New Media, Belong, ThinkCX, BluTV

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

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.