We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation."Support is good and it works fine."
"It integrates well with the CICD pipeline."
"I like the script engine of CA, where you can build everything you want."
"The night processing helps to have data just-in-time for the morning."
"I like that Automic Workload Automation has many features compared to other products. There are a lot of good features, and architecture-wise there is a valuable client concept. The architecture and the multi-tenancy is a multi-client concept. That is also useful."
"We are able to control and change our processes when necessary."
"The reason we went with Automic is very simple. We were using ESP, which was a Broadcom product. So, Automic happened to be a natural fit. It was a much easier transition from ESP to Automic. We had familiarity with the vendor and the product."
"Integration with most of the platforms that we have within the company's Windows, Linux, and Unix. Integrating these inside the automation agent for scheduling, backups, file transfer, and SAP jobs."
"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."
"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,"
"GoAnywhere stands out for its user-friendly project creation, intuitive testing and troubleshooting, and especially its notification system, which keeps me informed of any issues that need attention, a feature we lacked before."
"The most valuable feature of MFT is the security it provides for our data. MFT allows us to add additional authorization and passwords to any file attachments we send via email, and also to limit the number of times the recipient can download the file."
"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 most valuable feature is the Advanced Workflows."
"It enabled us to allocate staff toward other work. All the time that we would have wasted worrying about this stuff and correcting problems is put into other parts of our job. That's one of the best things about it, is that we don't waste time on these projects. We just don't have to worry about them because it lets us know if there's a problem."
"Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT supports the PeSIT protocol."
"With every new version, things that would previously work, Automic breaks them. So, we have to report the new bugs. Therefore, every time when we patch the system, there is usually a new bug or a feature that was working, then it stops working."
"There could be a better user interface for end users. They should make it more intuitive, not based on Java."
"Automic Workload Automation could improve the SaaS deployment."
"We would like to have token-based authentication. Where we do not have to use a password, and can use tokens for authentication in other systems."
"There has to be a better way to visualize things in the application without having so many windows open."
"My biggest complaint is that there is no list price. We work with Oracle, Microsoft, IBM, etc., and all of them have list pricing. Automic, right up until today, has never had list pricing. This makes things difficult, because we need to plan budgets for the next year and can't."
"The one big issue that we have is around passwords and not being able to update passwords through a different tool. This is not available yet."
"The manage file transfer area could be better. The file transfer area needs improvement. Other products like Control-M have some good features in this area."
"The support could be enhanced a little bit... If the first echelon of support could say, 'Okay, you are trying to create a variable,' and could tell you what you have to do, that would be good."
"The process of adding a vendor is very easy. You just point and click. You create your job, schedule, and project, and off you go. You just need to know what the processes do when you add in a new job that runs daily and so on. For us, it is not a problem, but maybe the documentation on that could be a little more straightforward. We, however, have no problems figuring that out. It is pretty straightforward for us."
"GoAnywhere's interface could be a little more intuitive."
"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."
"The solution's support for the Unix platform and AS2 should be improved."
"In some scenarios, when you are in a cluster environment, the load-balancing capabilities of the gateway need to be improved a little. This functionality needs some improvement."
"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."
"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."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT is ranked 7th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 27 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". 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". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and AppWorx 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.
We monitor all Workload Automation 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.
