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

Control-M vs Fortra's Globalscape WAFS 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

Control-M
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
320
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (2nd)
Fortra's Globalscape WAFS
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
25th
Average Rating
4.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Control-M is 6.1%, down from 7.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Fortra's Globalscape WAFS is 1.3%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Control-M6.1%
Fortra's Globalscape WAFS1.3%
Other92.6%
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
it_user2754 - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Manager at a construction company with 51-200 employees
We dropped the product because of the corruption issue.
Two main issues. 1) It can be a bandwidth resource hog over a small WAN link. We would routinely saturate a 3Mbps link with WAFS. This can be mitigated with tuning what gets replicated. 2) In some cases, it can look like the files get replicated because the files have the correct date, file size, etc. However, the file itself was actually all nulls. In our replication case, we had more than 10,000 files get corrupted this way (out of 1.2 million). GlobalScape support basically said that there were issues with W2K8 R2 but the problem actually dated back to 2008 on a W2K3 server.We dropped the product because of the corruption issue.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Control-M has positively impacted my organization, as instead of having multiple chunks and segments of independent standalone products, I have been using Control-M's suite of tools, whether it is workflow automation, agent orchestration, or data orchestration from across multiple sources, helping me control and coordinate all of these in one place."
"The most valuable feature is the automation process."
"We have a team called pro-mon and they monitor all the jobs for us. A single view for them makes it easy for them to monitor things."
"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."
"Overall, Control-M integrates seamlessly with our DataOps and DevOps stack, with no challenges."
"The solution has the power to reduce resources, which is good for business. It is constantly updated to remain compatible with new technologies such as Amazon, Azure, and Google Cloud. It's very easy to take advantage of the compatibilities."
"Control-M helps in bringing these different silos and platforms onto a single console where we can configure, monitor, and control all enterprise-level applications in a single platform."
"The type of automation which Control-M provides is quite good, as it helped us automate multiple things on a client environment."
"When it works, WAFS is a good way to keep data synchronized between multiple servers in multiple locations."
 

Cons

"There is no superiority when compared with other products. All products provide the same functionality."
"From a support perspective, BMC technical support needs improvements."
"The stability of Control-M has Not been great. A big thing we've been trying to work on with BMC is observability. Modern applications should be observable and resilient, but we're finding that sometimes Control-M is not very resilient and many times Control-M is not very observable."
"I would like to see improvement in the integration of modules."
"Version compatibility is one of the very few areas with room for improvement, but it is a big issue with minimum support."
"Control-M can be improved with stronger AI capabilities, as it is architecturally weak in this area."
"The solution should improve the out-of-the box conversion tool for migrations so the percentage result isn't so low."
"For installing or upgrading the PeopleSoft and SAP plugins, currently there is no way to do it via Control-M Configuration Manager. So, we are installing or upgrading the plugins, like PeopleSoft and SAP, manually. If BMC could provide an option via Control-M Configuration Manager to upgrade these plugins, it probably would reduce a lot of manual work as well as ease our work. This is one improvement that I personally want to see, because it would help our way of working."
"In some cases, it can look like the files get replicated because the files have the correct date, file size, etc. However, the file itself was actually all nulls."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost."
"Its cost is a little bit higher than other solutions such as AutoSys or DAC. For the demo, there were some plans, such as start plan, scale plan, etc. Pricing was based on the plan."
"BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."
"The pricing is moderate, not too low or too high compared to other solutions."
"Licensing costs are around $3000 a year."
"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."
"The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."
"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."
Information not available
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
Financial Services Firm
21%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business50
Midsize Enterprise36
Large Enterprise289
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

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

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
Information Not Available
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.