Control-M vs Thru comparison

BMC and Thru are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. BMC is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.5, while Thru is ranked #27. BMC holds a 4.8% mindshare in MFT, compared to Thru’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 98% of BMC users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Thru users who would recommend it.

Control-M

Read 126 Control-M reviews

20,716 Views
1,657 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

Thru

Read 1 Thru review

221 Views
188 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Control-M

Thru

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Control-M and Thru based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

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

To learn more, read our detailed Managed File Transfer (MFT) Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,295 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

Control-M

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

3rd

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

126

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (2nd), Workload Automation (1st)

Thru

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

27th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Control-M is 4.8%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Thru is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

Featured Reviews

Ujjwal Sachdeva

Data scientist at Advarisk

Efficient automation and boosted workflow but needs better integration methods

Control-M is a bit faster compared to other solutions. The job and coding are easier. Also, my DevOps and Ops teams work collaboratively with it, enhancing its efficiency. The workflow is much easier compared to the ACS services we were using. Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.

Read full review

reviewer1090674

Business Analyst at a media company with 1-10 employees

Scalable, reliable, and excellent support

I have been using Thru for approximately two years The stability of Thru is very good. Thru is a scalable solution. We have approximately 50 people using this solution. The technical support from Thru is great. I rate the support of Thru a five out of five. Positive The initial setup of Thru…

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

"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."

"The File Transfer component is quite valuable. The integration with products such as Informatica and SAP are very valuable to us as well. Rather than having to build our own interface into those products, we can use the ones that come out of the box. The integration with databases is valuable as well. We use database jobs quite a bit."

"The workflow is much easier compared to the ACS services we were using."

"Before Control-M, we didn't have a centralized view and could not view what happened in the past to determine what will happen in the future. The Gantt view that we have in Control-M is like a project view. It is nice because we sometimes have some application maintenance that we need to do. So, in a single console, we can hold the jobs for the next hour or two. We can release that job when it is finished. This is a really nice feature that we didn't have before. It is something really simple, but we didn't previously have a console where we could say, "For the next two hours, what are the jobs that we will run? And, hold these jobs not to run." This is really important."

"The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced."

"It is very easy to use. The HA feature is also very good."

"Control-M has enabled true enterprise batch automation, which combined with the other BMC Control products on our mainframe platform, allows us to run a 24/7 site with the lights out."

"Control-M is excellent when it comes to building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows. Those workflows are of very high importance to our operations."

More Control-M pros

"The stability of Thru is very good."

Cons

"There should be an expansion in storing more data as it currently provides data storage for only up to 60 days."

"A Control-M on-prem license is based on the number of jobs, which is the number of tasks a particular customer wants to have. These tasks have to be run within 24 hours window. For example, if you have a license for 100 jobs, you can run a maximum of 100 jobs in a 24-hour window. If your operations could not run 10 jobs, and they ran only 90 jobs, they just carry over to the next day, but the next day, they will have 110 jobs. Control-M asks you to buy those 10 more licenses because you were out of compliance in terms of the number of licenses. This is something that needs to be indicated in Control-M GUI so that customers know the number of licenses they're going to use in this time window. Their support and documentation should be improved. I am not that satisfied with their customer support. Sometimes, they don't have the answers. Their documentation is very poor. It is not well written, and it is not in a very logical manner. You can use it on Unix, Linux, Windows, and AIX, but it needs some improvement on iSeries. It needs a built-in mechanism inside the system to give you an option to restore from the last point of failure. If a process crashes, the Control-M needs to have a mechanism in iSeries where the process can be restored from the last point of failure."

"With the current version update, I'm not sure why we needed a separate database upgrade. Why not put it all in one package? Previously, you could do it either via a manual upgrade or an in-place upgrade but it wasn't separate."

"It can definitely expand promotions, so that a single job can be moved. Currently you can only promote a job by promoting the entire table."

"You need to pay for extra features if you need them."

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

"A lot of businesses are using ServiceNow, which is another tool. I would like there to be some integration with ServiceNow or other third-party tools as well as have easily available integrations. Right now, we need to write scripts. Apart from that, if there were some integrations with an ITSM tool, then that would be good. Because at the end of the day, most of our clients are using different ITSM tools. I know that BMC Remedy is easy to integrate with Control-M. However, if there was availability for Jira as well as other ITSM and DevOps tools, that would be a good improvement."

"I would like to see automatic license management. And probably more importantly, some kind of machine learning to help identify the optimum automation path."

More Control-M cons

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not bad. The company can afford it, and it pays for itself. We have those jobs running automatically."

"There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."

"We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing."

"Cost-wise, it is good."

"The pricing is reasonable. It's not an exorbitant amount. The licensing is pretty reasonable for the number of jobs that we run."

"As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost."

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

"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."

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

"Overall, the price of the solution is good for what it does, but when you want to add some features it can get expensive."

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

865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

26%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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...

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?

Its cost can be more competitive. One of the main things customers look at is the cost. It's not affordable. The cost is very high, according to my customers. The licensing cost is very high, and t...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

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 8% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

GoAnywhere MFT vs Thru

Compared 54% of the time

Aspera On Demand vs Thru

Compared 46% of the time

More Thru Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

August 2025

Download Control-M product report

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

July 2025

Download Thru product report

Also Known As

Control M

No data available

Interactive Demo

BMC

Thru

Overview

Control-M by BMC offers orchestration for hybrid cloud workflows, starting at $29,000 annually. It's designed for teams managing dependencies efficiently with automation and scheduling capabilities.

Control-M is known for its automation, integration, and scheduling capabilities. It provides a user-friendly GUI for seamless third-party application integration and robust file transfer capabilities. Role-based administration features, self-service portals, and the ability to handle complex workflows enhance operational efficiency. Its control modules enable diverse integrations, while forecasting, monitoring, and alerting functionalities improve reliability and adaptability across platforms, making it essential for orchestrating tasks efficiently.

What are Control-M's key features?

User-Friendly GUI: Offers intuitive interface for easy navigation.
Seamless Third-Party Integration: Facilitates smooth interaction with other tools.
Robust File Transfer: Ensures reliable and secure data movement.
Role-Based Administration: Enhances security and access control.
Self-Service Portal: Enables users to manage tasks independently.
Forecasting and Monitoring: Provides predictive insights for better planning.

What benefits and ROI should users look for?

Operational Efficiency: Streamlines processes and reduces manual tasks.
Improved Reliability: Minimizes errors with automated workflows.
Real-Time Insights: Offers visibility into job performance and system status.
Scalability: Adapts to growing business needs.
Integration Flexibility: Supports diverse applications and environments.

Control-M is vital in industries like financial services, data management, and IT operations. It automates batch processing, job automation, and file transfers, supporting applications such as SAP, Oracle, and Informatica. This enhances transparency, reduces errors, and provides insights into job performance and system status.

BMC

Thru’s enterprise-class managed file transfer as a service (MFTaaS) started in the cloud in 2002 and continues to provide cloud-based automated file transfer and ad hoc file sharing capabilities to some of the world’s largest corporations. Our cloud-native architecture continually delivers tangible, escalating returns on investment by uniquely addressing the most challenging secure file transfer requirements.

Meet governance and compliance standards with the help of Thru: Every layer of our service has antivirus scanning, end-to-end encryption and a full audit trail.

Significantly reduce IT overhead and costs from on-premises servers: Migrate to our cloud to hand off deployment, maintenance, scaling and more to Thru’s award-winning team of file transfer experts.

Our out-of-the-box MFT connectors and APIs extend integration platform (iPaaS) capabilities, adding persistence and guaranteed delivery to file transfers.

Execute internal or external file transfers with Thru's distributed hybrid architecture: The Thru Node (an MFT agent) is installed on-premises for internal transfers with orchestration by the cloud.

Contact Thru to discuss your managed file transfer options.

Thru

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc

Dell EMC, Plus 500, Manhattan Associates, NetworkRail, Blackbaud, AB InBev, Blackwoods, Sage, Crocs

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

July 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, IBM, BMC and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,295 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.