We performed a comparison between BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer and Control-M 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."What I like best about BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is that it makes transfers more secure and faster. It has a recovery feature during failed file transfers."
"There's another feature called Workload Archiving, where the data for all the jobs can be stored for however many days that we want, which is very useful for any historical analytics."
"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is highly stable. It is enterprise-grade software. Doing a job of 10,000 to 20,000 the solution is very stable."
"The GUI is good if I'm comparing it to other scheduling products."
"The most valuable features of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer are the ease of use and the ability to watch the files as they transfer called Watch File Transfer. There is a separate monitoring window that is useful."
"Our customers find the self-service feature the most valuable. Control-M offers great value to businesses by providing an option to see different flows and control and orchestrate the sequence of the execution. It is easy to use and integrate with different solutions. It is a good solution that is easy to implement and deliver."
"The job scheduling and file transfer are two major, important features."
"The product works very well with the modules. If you have MFT, Managed File Transfer, or the old AFT, you can link that to processing jobs."
"We can tie together all the workloads across the estate and make the whole process reactive to events."
"It gives us the ability to have end-to-end workflows, no matter where they're running."
"The solution has the power to reduce resources, which is good for business. It is constantly updated to remain compatible with new technologies such as Amazon, Azure, and Google Cloud. It's very easy to take advantage of the compatibilities."
"The best part about this product is that it has a lot of features. Control-M doesn't limit us and we can use it for a lot of things."
"It is very easy to use. The HA feature is also very good."
"The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced."
"In our bank, all new applications need to be implemented with Control-M. We try to look for the best way to establish communication between both products. One of the new features for us is Application Integrator. It is a very interesting feature because it lets us integrate with those applications that are not included in Control-M. By using Application Integrator, we can easily integrate new technologies. With the help of Application Integrator, we recently integrated with Blue Prism, which is a robotic product. We could integrate such processes into Control-M. Now, we are working with Ansible, and we are putting Ansible automated processes into Control-M."
"Speeds up processes and automated tasks."
"One can opt for either a job-based license or a job execution-based license, which sometimes can be troublesome. If the job count exceeds a limit, you may need to procure additional licenses from BMC."
"There are eight different kinds of dashboards in Workflow Insights, but there could be more because there is third party software that provides more dashboard styles."
"Its price could be better."
"The structure between the Control-M/Server and Control-M/Agent could possibly be improved."
"This solution could be improved by making it possible to better control GUI when interfacing with other systems."
"Before we transfer files we have to make the connection profile first for MFT. If we did not have to do this and send the transfer files directly, that would be useful."
"Password vaulting would be a feature that should be included."
"Scalability is something that needs to be improved."
"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."
"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."
"One feature I would like to include is in the middle of the monitoring domain. In the monitoring domain, if I have to update a number of jobs, the only way to do it is by manually clicking on each job. I would like a feature that allows me to do a mass update in the jobs, which I feel is still lacking."
"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."
"The stability of Control-M has Not been great. A big thing we've been trying to work on with BMC is observability. Modern applications should be observable and resilient, but we're finding that sometimes Control-M is not very resilient and many times Control-M is not very observable."
"Sometimes, with technical support, they will take feedback, but you don't know where that feedback goes or if it proceeds along in the thought process."
"The high availability that comes from BMC with its supplied Postgres database is very limited. Even using your customer-supplied Postgres database is problematic. We have engaged with them regarding this, but it is difficult. My company doesn't want to do this and BMC doesn't want to do that. We just need to find some middle ground to get the proper high availability. We're also moving away, like the rest of the world, from the more expensive offerings, like Oracle. We are trying to use Postgres, which is free. The stability is good. It is just that the high availability configuration is not ideal. It could be better."
"The community and the networking that goes on within that community need improvement. We want to be able to reach out to an SME, and say, "Hey, we are doing it this way. Does that make sense?" Ideally, they come back. and say, "Yes, it does make sense to do it that way. However, if you want to do it this way, then it is a little more efficient." We understand that one solution framework doesn't fit everybody. Depending on the breadth of the data and how broad it is, you may have different models for one over the other."
More BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is ranked 4th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 21 reviews while Control-M is ranked 2nd in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 110 reviews. BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is rated 8.8, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer writes "Adaptable, useful file transfer, and has helpful technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is most compared with IBM Sterling File Gateway, MOVEit, Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct and CA XCOM Data Transport, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ESP Workload Automation Intelligence. See our BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer vs. Control-M 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.
