We performed a comparison between IBM Sterling File Gateway and webMethods ActiveTransfer 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 aspect is that it has good functionality."
"It's highly configurable, there is no need for standalone scripting."
"It offers easy utilization of resources for smooth transfers."
"This product has been a leader in the field of secure file exchange."
"I have found almost all the features valuable."
"Very high functionality with the ability to plug in your own code."
"ActiveTransfer lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it. After that, we can remove the file to make sure that the reconciliation process is done. Sometimes we will zip and unzip the files, but if we have a GKB file, we often ignore it."
"The core product can be used not only for automatic file transfers between applications, but also as an Enterprise Service Bus (ESB)."
"Not a ten because it's a bit complex, not so simple. It's one product but there are many screens."
"Too many features; UI is not good."
"I would like to see auto-deployment without service disruptions."
"The API capabilities could be expanded to make integration more versatile."
"The admin console needs some work."
"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."
"I have noticed that webMethods ActiveTransfer has had problems when handling large files. For example, when we receive (and perform operations on) files that are larger than about 16 MB, the software starts losing performance."
"Some things could be improved, especially how ActiveTransfer handles third-party file transfers. It would be nice to have a native file-watching mechanism for when you're scheduling jobs with a third-party scheduler. Currently, we are using an outside file watcher solution to check the files before the file transfer. It checks the location to see if the file is there. If the file is there, it will prepare it for transfer. If the file isn't available, it will send an email it can create a ticket send it now. We recommended adding this file watcher mechanism."
IBM Sterling File Gateway is ranked 3rd in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 6 reviews while webMethods ActiveTransfer is ranked 17th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 2 reviews. IBM Sterling File Gateway is rated 7.4, while webMethods ActiveTransfer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM Sterling File Gateway writes "Easy to use with good validation and monitoring of the file transfer". On the other hand, the top reviewer of webMethods ActiveTransfer writes "It lets us maintain the file in the staging area before we transfer it". IBM Sterling File Gateway is most compared with MOVEit, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, Aspera Managed File Transfer, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer and Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, whereas webMethods ActiveTransfer is most compared with Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer and Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer. See our IBM Sterling File Gateway vs. webMethods ActiveTransfer 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.
