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

IBM Sterling File Gateway vs Kiteworks comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
BMC Logo
32,942 views|13,333 comparisons
Kiteworks Logo
1,126 views|894 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM Sterling File Gateway and Kiteworks 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 IBM Sterling File Gateway vs. Kiteworks report (Updated: September 2022).
632,611 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
"The unified view where you can define, orchestrate, and monitor applications, workflows, and data pipelines is important because we have more than one team working on Control-M. We have a support team, a job-creation team, and a SAP team. We can all work together on it. It avoids anyone from working on his part and not using the latest modifications.""The initial setup is largely straightforward.""It is very easy to use. The HA feature is also very good.""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.""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.""Control-M is useful to automate all critical and non-critical processes. Using Control-M, we can automate application workflows as well as file transfers involved in application workflows. We can also use it to run batches related to applications. Automating these processes reduces the RTO and RPO, which helps in the case of failures. It also helps us to identify bottlenecks and take corrective measures.""As soon as you have an issue, a ticket is created and the tech support is quite responsive.""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."

More Control-M Pros →

"I have found almost all the features valuable.""Very high functionality with the ability to plug in your own code."

More IBM Sterling File Gateway Pros →

"The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files."

More Kiteworks Pros →

Cons
"The infrastructure could be improved.""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.""Its installation can be better. Currently, we have to install it manually. The file transfer feature can also be improved. It is not very easy to transfer a file from business to business. In terms of new features, they can include new technologies. It can have API integration.""The stability could be improved. I ran into an issue with a recent Control-M patch. The environment would become unstable if security ports were scanned. This is an area they need to improve on, but ultimately it's a relatively small improvement.""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.""Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features.""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.""Everybody's biggest gripe is the reporting capability option. It is a gripe because there is a lot of information in Control-M, but the solution doesn't have a good reporting tool to extract that information. Now, if you want all that information, you need to rely on another third-party BI tool to extract the information out of Control-M."

More Control-M Cons →

"Too many features; UI is not good.""IBM is advising not to use the IT translate anymore but this is going to be an extra cost to the customer to use the alternative."

More IBM Sterling File Gateway Cons →

"File location could be improved."

More Kiteworks 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 →

  • "There are two types of customer licenses, an annual preview license, and an ELA-based license. I have found the solution is priced well. However, they need to review the pricing model because if you look at any other competitors, such as GlobalSCAPE, they do pricing based on the components and what you select. With this solution you have a monolithic application which you need to buy, there is no component level price discount."
  • More IBM Sterling File Gateway Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
    632,611 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:The web interface is handy. It's easy to use, and Control-M provides you with the necessary materials to understand the… more »
    Top Answer:I have found almost all the features valuable.
    Top Answer:There are two types of customer licenses, an annual preview license, and an ELA-based license. I have found the solution… more »
    Top Answer:IBM is advising not to use the IT translate anymore but this is going to be an extra cost to the customer to use the… more »
    Top Answer:Kiteworks is a secured file sharing platform that enables users to collaborate with different parties across a robust… more »
    Top Answer:The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files.
    Top Answer:They could improve the location of their file.
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Control M
    Accellion
    Learn More
    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

    Securely manage transfer files with authentication, encryption and audit trails while you retain administrative control of data using a library of templates.

    Sterling File Gateway can help you increase secure and dependable file transfer with your trading partners. It consolidates disparate centers of file transfer activity and facilitates the security-rich exchange of file-based data over the Internet. It helps companies avoid the risk and operational issues that can result from using loosely controlled file-transfer servers.

    Kiteworks empowers organizations to effectively manage risk in every send, share, receive, and save of sensitive content over numerous communications channels: email, file sharing, managed file transfer, APIs, and web forms. The Kiteworks platform unifies, tracks, controls, and secures sensitive content moving within, into, and out of an organization, significantly improving risk management and ensuring regulatory compliance.

    Offer
    Learn more about Control-M
    Learn more about IBM Sterling File Gateway
    Learn more about Kiteworks
    Sample Customers
    CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
    Information Not Available
    United States Securities and Exchange Commission, National Health Service, Husch Blackwell LLP, NYC Health + Hospitals, Viatris, MITRE Corporation, Chubb, Kraft Heinz, KPMG, Kohler, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Purdue Pharma, AVL
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Retailer8%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm23%
    Computer Software Company21%
    Insurance Company9%
    Comms Service Provider7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm30%
    Computer Software Company18%
    Insurance Company10%
    Comms Service Provider5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Government12%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Comms Service Provider8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise78%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business11%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise65%
    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.
    632,611 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    IBM Sterling File Gateway is ranked 9th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 2 reviews while Kiteworks is ranked 13th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 1 review. IBM Sterling File Gateway is rated 5.6, while Kiteworks is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of IBM Sterling File Gateway writes "Plenty of valuable features, reliable, and technical support helpful". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Kiteworks writes "Enables easy uploading and sharing of files; file location could be improved". IBM Sterling File Gateway is most compared with AWS Transfer for SFTP, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, Aspera Managed File Transfer, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer and MOVEit, whereas Kiteworks is most compared with HelpSystems GoAnywhere MFT, AWS Transfer for SFTP, MOVEit, Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer and Microsoft Office SharePoint Server.

    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.