No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

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

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 13, 2026

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
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Control-M
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
321
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (2nd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (2nd)
 

Featured Reviews

Kyle Titus - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
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 solution has helped with collaboration in our organization."
"The most valuable feature for us is data persistence, because it basically gives you a snapshot history and the solution also offers good data recovery."
"The solution offers good data recovery."
"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."
"A lot of human work has been automated through Control-M, although we do not have quantification of the exact savings."
"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."
"Control-M performs very well in building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows, and this workflow orchestration is important for DataOps and DevOps teams because it enables centralized scheduling activity and automation of complex workflows, thus improving operational efficiency and ensuring better governance and compliance."
"Promotions between environments, as well as local, mass update, versioning, and self-service."
"The user experience with Control-M is good. Users can implement many customizations, and though the licensing is pricey, there are many competitive products available that can provide the same features as BMC."
"The main positive impact of Control-M includes time savings; we have automated many manual things that usually take six to seven hours, and now it is taking less than thirty minutes to one hour."
"I find Control-M for SAP and Control-M for Informatica good. You can connect to the Linux or Windows servers, and you can run multiple jobs."
"The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced."
 

Cons

"SFTP would be better if it was 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."
"Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops."
"The reporting functionality needs a lot of work. We have faced problems with different versions where we run the right report, but it gives us blank entries. Then, when we run the same report again, it gives the correct data."
"Control-M could be improved, but I have no frustrations because AI features have been included and continue to be added, which is great."
"Using Control-M has made it pretty much impossible to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines across on-premises and cloud technologies."
"I did not give it a nine because troubleshooting complex workloads sometimes requires specialized knowledge, and the interface can feel less interactive for new users."
"From the perspective of return on investment, I see room for improvement."
"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."
"One thing we have criticized is the MFTE capabilities, particularly regarding high availability. BMC hasn't provided a setup with multiple fallbacks for error situations."
"One area that could be improved is the user interface. While the platform is very powerful, the UI can sometimes feel complex for new users, and it may take time to become familiar with all the features."
 

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."
"There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."
"Pricing varies depending on which components and modules you are using."
"It is a little bit expensive."
"It was a little bit pricey. They were proud of the product. A particular module was not free. However, BMC was able to negotiate that particular module into our whole contract itself without having to negotiate an individual price for that module. All that was included in a one-time negotiation, and we've signed a five-year contract on that."
"BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."
"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."
"we are more looking for a better cost/license/performance model because BMC, while we could say it's the best, is also the most expensive. That is what we are probably most annoyed with. We are paying something like €1,000,000 over three years for having 4,000 jobs running. That's expensive."
"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
921,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
12%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Outsourcing 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 Business50
Midsize Enterprise37
Large Enterprise289
 

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
Control-M sits at the premium end of workload automation pricing — that is no secret, and I will not pretend otherwise. My position after decades of using it: the enterprise value justifies the pre...
What needs improvement with Control-M?
My main improvement point after decades with the product is not a feature — it is the path to mastery. Basic administration of Control-M is fairly accessible: a new person can define and monitor jo...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, BMC, Progress Software and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: October 2026.
921,148 professionals have used our research since 2012.