Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vs Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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

SEEBURGER Business Integrat...
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
39
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (6th), API Management (22nd), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (12th)
Sterling Commerce Connect:D...
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is 2.6%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is 8.1%, up from 8.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

VARUNKUMAR - PeerSpot reviewer
Great end-to-end integration, data mapping, and communication protocols
At this moment, everything is working fine. When we are talking to them, when we are trying to bring all this mapping in-house, right now, SEEBURGER is doing everything for us. However, when we are thinking of going onto the cloud, so they are not using any of AWS or Azure which are more stable. They have their own private cloud. That's the reason we did not go ahead with managing everything by ourselves or moving into the cloud. They said that they're going to be doing it within the next two years, having access to Azure and AWS. That would be something we would like to see.
Sumit Mundik - PeerSpot reviewer
Has good file transfer speed, but licensing cost is too high
The initial setup of the solution is not straightforward because it's not GUI-based. If you are installing the solution on a UNIX server, you should have a basic understanding of UNIX. You should know how to go from one directory to another, what the config files are, how to edit those files, and how to get the backup of those files. You need a little technical knowledge for it. The developers working on the solution are very costly for the organization. Also, the complexity of having this kind of setup is very difficult. This solution is only used by giant financial companies like BNY Mellon, Barclays, and JPMorgan Chase. They cannot replace the solution because they have several files transferred internally using it. It is very difficult and cost-consuming for them to change, migrate, or upgrade their system. That's the reason they are not able to do it very easily.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"What would have been a manual process of transmitting data items around between us and third-parties has been automated. SEEBURGER BIS handles the automation and mapping side of the communications. The automation, along with the efficiency around time and cost, has improved our organization. Around 20,000 messages a month have been automated. These typically would be financial/order transactions and confirmations in invoicing that have been automated."
"It is stable and reliable. We have not had any issues."
"The product has the ability to handle high volumes of data efficiently."
"SEEBURGER BIS can reconcile documentation, like our accounts payable and statements within the system. If you are manually doing it, then it is really time consuming with a lot of errors. Whereas, SEEBURGER BIS allows for a lot of basic level programming within the documentation, filtering, and sorting out VLOOKUP. It lets us get two database tables from two different systems, then merge them based on the logic that we provide. So, it is a very helpful product."
"One of the things that SEEBURGER always touts is their ability to do "any to any" formatting... it doesn't matter if you want to take a CSV file or an XML file or a flat file or a PDF file or a structure EDI file; you can transform it from one format to another - any to any or even to the same format - which is a really nice feature."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is simple to use and straightforward."
"The solution is flexible when it comes to adding integrations. It is much easier to use than the other tools we have to move the files. Across the board, we can move files in a short amount of time compared to our other existing tools."
"We had a requirement for transferring data to Amazon S3 buckets but we did not have a solution in our shop for large data transfers to Amazon S3. We worked with SEEBURGER and created a framework solution and now, using that solution, we can configure the transfer in an hour or two and enable it to go to existing or new S3 buckets."
"Security is the most valuable feature of this product."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is a solution that is on the market for a very long time. There is an integrator that has been developed and evolves every year. On the roadmap, there is always a new integration. For example, it's one of the solutions in the market that out of the box can handle EBICS protocol. The file processing is done very well. By default, there are a lot of configurations that can be customized."
"Connect Direct offers Check Point functionality to ensure data integrity during transfers."
"The solution's file transfer speed is quite high."
"For Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, my overall rating is ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is its flexibility with encryption."
"Connect Direct offers Check Point functionality to ensure data integrity during transfers."
"Automation is the most valuable feature."
 

Cons

"They made improvements to the email error alerts that go out, for the EDI technical. Those typically go straight out to the partners. Those messages are significantly clearer and easy to read. The same messages in the front end are not nearly as clear. It's supposed to be the same error, but the message that goes out for EDI is really easy for anybody to read and understand, but you have to be really solution-savvy to understand the message in the system itself."
"We are a little locked in with understanding the errors that we receive. We are working with their support to prevent these issues when they come into the database. We use a SQL database and believe they can do better when it comes working with large databases. We have had few instances where the system is hanging, which are most likely from the database. We are working with their support to find out the problem and fix their system. We have tried to use their notification system to prevent these issues, but they need to improve their monitoring system."
"We occasionally get ZIP files. Sometimes the ZIP file has one file inside of it, and sometimes the ZIP file might have 30 files inside of it. We have been working with SEEBURGER to enhance their PKUNZIP process to be able to unzip multiple files in a single workflow instead of just one file. This is still something that is in process."
"We wanted to use API. We were told that in 6.52 we could use API management. Later on, we found that API management wasn't that completely integrated into the 6.52 solution, and if you wanted to have the whole API suite you might have to go to 6.7, the latest one."
"There might be some improvements they could make to the portal, but they're not anything that stops me from working."
"SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite does not have an end user or subscriber console which can show the traffic status."
"The initial setup is not the straightforward. It took couple of months for us to set up."
"I would've liked, from day one, to learn how to do my own mapping. That would have saved a lot of time and effort if that had been brought forward earlier. It's there, I just didn't know about it. Also, some tidier, easier-to-use interfaces would help."
"The resources required for this tool are costly and not easily available in the market."
"This solution cannot be deployed on a root_squash NFS, which limits superuser privileges."
"Sometimes we face issues and can't figure out the cause of failures."
"They have File Agent, which is an additional utility and a component of Connect:Direct, for automated file transmission. In that utility, there is some issue with the file name. There is a limitation on the file name, and that is being fixed by IBM."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct could improve by adding some of the functionality that some other vendors have. For example, GoAnywhere has call agents, which are small clients that can be installed on the endpoints and can be handled by the central point on the server. If I want to do this with the IBM solution, I have to sell a lot of account addresses. The price could be unprofitable for the customer. There is some small functionality that could be implemented and could be easily done to improve this solution."
"Technical support is the number one concern."
"The initial setup could be simpler and better."
"I do not have any notes for improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The only thing that would be an improvement would be if they had a cost model whereby you could just pay for what you're actually using. Even if it were a minimum monthly charge that they offered, if you're not utilizing all of that then they should consider a lower tier. That way, they could attract more business."
"The cost-based model is slightly different now in SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite (BIS). They changed the licensing, based on adapters and other things. In the old style of licensing, the whole suite was one license..."
"The pricing and licensing is very competitive."
"The solution provides the flexibility to start small and pay as you grow. SEEBURGER has a lot of offerings..."
"I had a problem at one time with their invoicing. I told them, then we worked on the process and improved it. They installed the connection between SAP and SEEBURGER BIS in Europe first. This was awhile ago. When I came along, I became involved in the project and started working with them. Every time that I made a request, the work was done well, but I was not receiving my invoices. I knew I had to pay for the work and was trying to find someone to send me the invoices or a report of what was being done. From that end, it was really not working. After a few years, I was complaining and not happy. At the end of the year, they would come with a long list of invoices to pay, which was really bad. So, I asked for a change. We worked on the process, and since five years ago, I have worked with SEEBURGER based in North America. Now, when I have a question, I know who to contact. They send me a report with invoices every month. They really reacted to my concern, and we improved the process. Since then, I have had no problem."
"They need to be more competitively priced. When it comes to training, they need to lower their prices. It shouldn't be so specific. Maybe they should outsource training to another company. From what I can see, their training is pretty expensive, and they don't do anything for free."
"I've heard that the solution is cheaper when compared to other products in the market."
"Our licensing model is based on transactions. We have a base service contract which is priced against a volume of transactions and another volume of individual transactions, which are covered by one service agreement. Then, we have development services on top of that. Our annual spend is around £80,000. It's about mid-priced, as there are some cheaper alternatives out there and some more expensive ones. It's neither cheap nor expensive. It's somewhere in the middle."
"The price and licensing of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is expensive."
"The solution's licensing cost is too high."
"Annual licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
42%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite is a highly stable solution that offers rich features for our B2B integration.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding the pricing of SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, I would rate it as 7 out of 10.
What needs improvement with SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite?
Regarding areas of improvement for SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite, the cloud functionality needs enhancement. The cloud interface is currently too cluttered, especially when creating new tran...
What needs improvement with Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct?
I do not find anything that needs improvement in Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct as a product. I have been supporting this solution, and it serves billions of customers well. Capgemini, in collabo...
What is your primary use case for Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct?
The primary use case of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is to transmit data. It offers two modes of transfers: SFTP, which is straightforward, and FTPS, which provides secure file transfer. A sign...
 

Also Known As

SEEBURGER BIS
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Altis, Autoliv, Cebi, Cofresco, MoneyGram International, Samsonite Europe, VSP Global, BMW Group, OSRAM, Magna, Lavazza
HZMO, Bank of Communications
Find out what your peers are saying about SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vs. Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.