We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch by Redwood and Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT 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."The most valuable feature is its stability. We've only had very minor issues and generally they have happened because someone has applied a patch on a Windows operating system and it has caused some grief. We've actually been able to resolve those issues quite quickly with ActiveBatch. In all the time that I've had use of ActiveBatch, it hasn't failed completely once. Uptime is almost 100 percent."
"From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good."
"The automation feature is a very valuable feature as the associates do not have to worry about performing repetitive tasks (i.e. endpoint security scans on a daily basis) that would take several hours to complete on a daily basis."
"One of the valuable features is the ability to trigger workflows, one after another, based on success, without having to worry about overlapping workflows. The ability to integrate our BI, analytics, and our data quality jobs is also valuable"
"It can connect to a number of third-party/legacy systems."
"ActiveBatch can automate predictable, repeatable processes very well. There is no real trick to what ActiveBatch does. ActiveBatch does exactly what you would expect a scheduling piece of software to do. It does it in a timely manner and does it with very little outside interference and fanfare. It runs when it is supposed to, and I don't have to jump through a bunch of hoops to double check it."
"ActiveBatch has reduced work by providing automated workflows across several different applications."
"It is very useful in sending confidential files through FPP servers."
"Transactions transfer in close to real time. Sometimes it takes a little bit of time because of the volume that we have, but the transactions transfer in seconds to the external platform."
"The user interface is simple."
"File monitors are one of the most valuable features. We have about 400 file monitors running in GoAnywhere. They monitor the NAS locations where files arrive, and they kick off workflows. When a file arrives, GoAnywhere will identify that the file is there, move it to a consumption zone, then reach out to our enterprise scheduler through a REST API call."
"The use of this product has helped improve our organization and its ability to send or receive. It has done this by allowing us to remove any homegrown process and centralize needed actions."
"When we were doing the demo, we took one project from the old system and got it running in GoAnywhere in less than 30 minutes. That says a lot. I've written queries and understand code, so I'm not a novice. Still, I think that's pretty impressive for a software product to be able to deliver a functional use case in half an hour."
"We like that GoAnywhere helps to centralize the exchange of data among our systems, employees, and customers."
"Its speed is the most valuable because every integration used to take months with old SOA tools, integration buses, and that type of stuff. Now, we do integrations in a matter of days. Security is another valuable thing because every step in the workflow has an audit trace, which is great. This also brings a lot of confidence in automating business process workflows through this type of solution."
"Another nice feature is that you can invoke a native program from GoAnywhere. That helps you because you don't have to get fancy with agents. If a native program runs on the server that GoAnywhere is running on, like sed or perl, you can use it,"
"As more organizations are moving towards a cloud-based infrastructure, ActiveBatch could incorporate more capabilities that support popular cloud platforms, such as AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud."
"Except for the GUI, everything looks good."
"There is this back and forth, where ActiveBatch says, "Your Oracle people should be dealing with this," and Oracle people say, "No, we don't know anything about ActiveBatch." Then, it all falls back on me as to what happens. Nobody is taking responsibility. This is the biggest failing for ActiveBatch."
"An area for improvement in ActiveBatch Workload Automation is its interface or GUI. It could be a little better. There isn't any additional feature I'd like to see in the tool, except for the GUI, everything looks good."
"A cloud option is not provided as a free feature, making it a costly solution for smaller organizations."
"ActiveBatch is a little complex."
"It does have a little bit of a learning curve because it is fairly complex. You have to learn how it does things. I don't know if it's any worse than any other tool would be, just because of the nature of what it does... the learning curve is the hardest part."
"I have faced struggles to understand, set up the tool, and implement it in my early days as a new user."
"The security could be upgraded to address novel cyberattacks. I'm not sure whether the product's security is being updated periodically."
"Upgrading was a challenge and I ran into some problems along the way."
"API functionality wasn't part of our initial unit testing because it wasn't necessary then. However, shortly after implementing GoAnywhere, two different vendors approached us to do API transactions. We checked to see if GoAnywhere could do this and found that it was supposed to have that capability, but it broke down."
"Its user interface can be improved. The current user interface is a little basic for some of the use cases. We have to use an external component to enhance it. When we need a more appealing user interface, we use an additional component, and that works okay."
"When a monitor invokes a project to accomplish something, that gets logged as a job. I've had a little difficulty figuring out where to look to see the monitor's activities itself, to see if the monitor is having a problem. For instance, if an account on a secure FTP server has expired, the monitor that uses that account doesn't announce to us that it's having a problem. I want to work with them on this to get it fixed."
"We are a little concerned because the maximum number of open connections allowed is 200, and we are pretty much maxed out... if they expanded the number of open connections allowed, we would be better off."
"There's one persnickety issue about NAS permissions. That is a problem we have run into with GoAnywhere. I would like to see more focus on compatibility with/enforcement of user roles and access permissions across NAS, among other things. We have filed a couple of tickets on that in the past."
"There are a number of built-in tasks in GoAnywhere. One, in particular, the write to CSV task, is slow. If you have, say, 100,000 records in your row set and you want to write them to a CSV file, it takes a long time. That definitely requires performance improvement."
ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 5th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 35 reviews while Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT is ranked 7th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 27 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT writes "Key to our workflow and our workload automation strategy, helping us trade and consume files". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, Redwood RunMyJobs and IBM Workload Automation, whereas Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT is most compared with MOVEit, JSCAPE by Redwood, IBM Sterling File Gateway, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct and Kiteworks. See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT report.
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.
