Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

AWS Transfer for SFTP vs Thru comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BMC Logo
33,681 views|13,420 comparisons
Amazon Logo
4,402 views|3,839 comparisons
Thru Logo
77 views|64 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AWS Transfer for SFTP and Thru based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS Transfer for SFTP vs. Thru report (Updated: September 2022).
635,987 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"Control-M provides us with a unified view, where we can easily define, orchestrate, and monitor all our application workflows and data pipelines. It also provides the ability to filter. So, if I don't want to see everything, I can also narrow it down or open ViewPoint. This is very important since we have thousands of jobs to monitor. If we did not have this ability, it would be very difficult to see what is going on.""The multiple scheduling options allow you to do anything you want, whenever you want, and however you want. You can easily be in control when things happen.""We are using Control-M for day-to-day operations only. It is helpful for us in our day-to-day operations. It is a key in our financial sector. We are automating via Control-M in our treasury operations, including any evening updates. Control-M makes things easier and faster by helping our treasury operations go without any interruptions.""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.""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.""In the client, it provides a unified view for me. I can alter the view that I want to see jobs and conditions. This is nice to have. The fact that you can see everything in one space is very important, especially these days where everything is about data and monitoring as well as because we are working from home on a global basis. So, I can monitor jobs in real-time, along with any failures or anything that might be stuck. The real-time monitoring and the ability to see everything in one place is important for us because we operate 24/7.""The product has improved dramatically over the years; it offers a lot in terms of features and capabilities and integration with third-party tools. A wide range of models available with the product is critical in reducing manual and mundane work such as custom script writing. This saves significant amounts of time and, by association, money for the organization.""We use Control-M for maintenance on our Oracle and SQL Server databases. It automates maintenance on packages, including standard procedures on the databases themselves, snapshots, checking integrity, verifying the RDBMS of the databases, etc. It ensures they aren't clogged and that they are running smoothly and that there aren't any jobs stuck, eating up the performance of the server or any of the CPU cores."

More Control-M Pros →

"The solution offers good data recovery."

More AWS Transfer for SFTP Pros →

"The stability of Thru is very good."

More Thru Pros →

Cons
"I am unsure if Control-M is compliant with Microsoft Azure environment integrations. We have some clients in Azure environments. Specifically, in Canada, government agencies and nonprofits mostly use Microsoft Azure.""The high availability that comes from BMC with its supplied Postgres database is very limited. Even using your customer-supplied Postgres database is problematic. We have engaged with them regarding this, but it is difficult. My company doesn't want to do this and BMC doesn't want to do that. We just need to find some middle ground to get the proper high availability. We're also moving away, like the rest of the world, from the more expensive offerings, like Oracle. We are trying to use Postgres, which is free. The stability is good. It is just that the high availability configuration is not ideal. It could be better.""I would like to have a web version of Control-M to replace the client. Currently, our support and jobs-creation teams are using the client and that needs to be installed on a PC. It's very heavy, consuming a lot of resources compared to the web portal. I know that they're trying to improve the client with the latest version, but for me, there hasn't been enough improvement yet.""They can give more predefined plug-ins so that we don't have to create them.""In general, it is a very good product, and we are very happy with it. It meets all of our expectations.""They really need to work on improving the web interface, as there are still a lot of bugs... In general, they need to do a lot of work on shoring up their testing and quality assurance. A lot of bugs seem to make it into the product.""I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product.""Integration with some applications and platforms is complex and requires development. We have done some integration with the application integrator, but it was more like a manual solution. This is an area that can be improved."

More Control-M Cons →

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

More AWS Transfer for SFTP Cons →

"The initial setup of Thru needed an engineer to be involved."

More Thru 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 →

    Information Not Available
  • "Overall, the price of the solution is good for what it does, but when you want to add some features it can get expensive."
  • More Thru Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
    635,987 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:We have a better picture of our auditability. When someone comes to us, and asks for sources, "How did the deltas… more »
    Top Answer:The solution offers good data recovery.
    Top Answer:SFTP would be better if it was more automated, particularly for file transfers. It would move things along more quickly… more »
    Top Answer:We use SFTP for code changes, and then deploy to AWS. We are customers of SFTP.
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Control M
    Learn More
    Thru
    Video Not Available
    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

    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.

    Thru’s File Exchange and Collaboration Platform, with its expansive integration capability and global presence, unshackles the limits on the most challenging Managed File Transfer, Software Delivery and Content Collaboration requirements on a single platform.

    Offer
    Learn more about Control-M
    Learn more about AWS Transfer for SFTP
    Learn more about Thru
    Sample Customers
    CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
    Myriota, FINRA, Celgene, Kontor New Media, Belong, ThinkCX, BluTV
    Dell EMC, Plus 500, VMware, HKS, Manhattan Associates, Blackbaud, Costa Cruises, VMware
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Retailer8%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm24%
    Computer Software Company20%
    Insurance Company9%
    Comms Service Provider7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm26%
    Computer Software Company15%
    Insurance Company10%
    Comms Service Provider8%
    No Data Available
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise78%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise79%
    No Data Available
    Buyer's Guide
    Managed File Transfer (MFT)
    September 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, HelpSystems, Seeburger and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: September 2022.
    635,987 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    AWS Transfer for SFTP is ranked 9th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 1 review while Thru is ranked 36th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 1 review. AWS Transfer for SFTP is rated 9.0, while Thru is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AWS Transfer for SFTP writes "Provides great data recovery and data persistence". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Thru writes "Scalable, reliable, and excellent support". AWS Transfer for SFTP is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, MOVEit and Aspera On Demand, 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.