We performed a comparison between AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] and Thru based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Progress Software, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT)."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."
"The solution offers good data recovery."
"The solution has helped with collaboration in our organization."
"The stability of Thru is very good."
"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."
"Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops."
"The initial setup of Thru needed an engineer to be involved."
AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 3 reviews while Thru is ranked 19th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 1 review. AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Thru is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] writes "Always works, handles all types of load, and allows us to have S3 files as storage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Thru writes "Scalable, reliable, and excellent support". AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, MOVEit, Kiteworks, CA XCOM Data Transport and Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, whereas Thru 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.