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

Aspera Managed File Transfer vs IBM Sterling File Gateway 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

Aspera Managed File Transfer
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
13th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Sterling File Gateway
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Aspera Managed File Transfer is 3.5%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Sterling File Gateway is 12.1%, up from 11.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

Michele Illiano - PeerSpot reviewer
Beneficial quick protocol, powerful, but limited use cases
Aspera Managed File Transfer should be packaged into another solution. Explaining to customers you need to have multiple solutions from multiple vendors for their use cases can get complicated for them to understand. The best way to propose a suite is to have an integrated suite where the customer could choose to license part of it. This solution could be one solution not two choices between 10 or 12 different solutions. The main feature of Aspera Managed File Transfer is the communication protocol, which is fast. There are a lot of different clients that are offering features related to these fast protocols. It's possible to create one unique suite that can handle this base protocol. It will be quite easy to propose to the customers.
Vinutha Gangadhara - PeerSpot reviewer
Ability to customize on top of the inbuilt processes, user-friendly and well-categorized
I’ve been part of this client for the last seven-plus years. It’s been close to 70 to 80 continuous improvements we have delivered. The priority ones which we always shortlist are the recurring incidents or recurring issues, which came in the initial phase of the year when we took this entire landscape under our maintenance. One such incident I can recollect is with respect to performance tuning. We committed to our users 99.99% and above as the availability metrics for Sterling Integrator. This has acted as a high-availability system, but we treat it as mission-critical. When it comes to the commitment we give to users, we have to ensure the system is kept most stable. So, the majority of the problem was in the communication channels. Whenever we enabled additional logging for the communication channel, the system used to have hiccups. So we worked with the vendor, stating that the visibility channel framework needs to be changed because the moment we enable more logging, it literally brings the system down, or the system doesn’t work as it should. They took our input and delivered a better framework in their next releases, which helped us after upgrading to have that stability intact. As the system grows, we ensure to have performance tuning triggered and optimize the business process wherever required. For example, by default, Sterling Integrator business process will have full logging enabled. We took care of those things. Not all business processes or workflows require full logging enabled. Only a few critical ones require every step logs. For the rest, we categorized and reduced the logging for those workflows. That actually helped us to increase the IO overall from ten milliseconds to six milliseconds. That was a good achievement. Apart from that, in terms of queues, how we maintain the queues, how we defined all file queues across the critical business process is one thing we felt was done better. The threads we assign for the priority queues and the business processes were configured to those priority queues, whatever is critical, so that it gets high priority to allow the threads to process. So that queue thread Sterling was taken under the performance tuning. Apart from that, I think some of the best practices which IBM recommends is what we usually run through every year. We just have the health check done through IBM, and we just ensure that all the best practice recommendations are added in the system.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Aspera Managed File Transfer is an optimal solution for customers who want to transfer large files to remote sites with lower bandwidth and in less time."
"Good user interface and ability to set up multiple file transfer jobs."
"The main feature of Aspera Managed File Transfer is that it's an incredibly fast protocol, you can use all the bandwidth available. If I need to send large amounts of data this is the fastest protocol on the market. I have been using it for some minor projects and it is very powerful."
"It offers easy utilization of resources for smooth transfers."
"It is a very flexible platform, and this flexibility is the best part of it."
"What I like best is that the tool is very secure and reliable. We can send huge files, even up to hundreds of GB. The automation depends on the source - it can be through automated processes, manual transfers, shell scripting, or file scripting. Partners can schedule batches according to their needs."
"It also has good error-handling methods."
"The biggest advantage of the tool is that it acts as a centralized solution for all the different protocols."
"One feature that we appreciate or use for multiple customers is the routing channel."
"I have found almost all the features valuable."
"Very high functionality with the ability to plug in your own code."
 

Cons

"Aspera Managed File Transfer should be packaged into another solution. Explaining to customers you need to have multiple solutions from multiple vendors for their use cases can get complicated for them to understand."
"The solution's pricing is high and should be reduced."
"Deployment is complex and it was difficult to get support."
"Not a ten because it's a bit complex, not so simple. It's one product but there are many screens."
"The admin console needs some work."
"The solution should provide content or videos explaining to freshers how to configure it and what every field means."
"The solution's technical support is sometimes slow to understand the use cases, and the answers are not practical."
"We need REST APIs or other tools to create that listening producer."
"I faced issues during stress testing."
"We have issues with the stability of this solution, like server-down issues."
"The number of failed files number increases with high workflow so that needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Aspera Managed File Transfer is not an inexpensive solution. I am not aware of many competitors to determine how affordable the price is overall."
"It's reasonably priced at $800,000."
"The solution's pricing is reasonable."
"There are two types of customer licenses, an annual preview license, and an ELA-based license. I have found the solution is priced well. However, they need to review the pricing model because if you look at any other competitors, such as GlobalSCAPE, they do pricing based on the components and what you select. With this solution you have a monolithic application which you need to buy, there is no component level price discount."
"I do know that it's generally considered expensive, but it's also widely used across corporate organizations due to its robust protocol communication, secure file transfer capabilities, and integration features. Although there are other tools on the market, IBM Sterling File Gateway stands out for its unique options and cloud compatibility, which offers future benefits, particularly in avoiding data storage issues."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
831,881 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Aspera Managed File Transfer?
Aspera Managed File Transfer is an optimal solution for customers who want to transfer large files to remote sites with lower bandwidth and in less time.
What needs improvement with Aspera Managed File Transfer?
The solution's pricing calculation needs revision to be more competitive
What advice do you have for others considering Aspera Managed File Transfer?
Aspera Managed File Transfer has superior technology. Overall, I rate Aspera Managed File Transfer a nine out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM Sterling File Gateway?
The cost-effectiveness of IBM Sterling File Gateway was a major factor in our decision to use it, in comparison to the higher costs associated with DataPower.
What needs improvement with IBM Sterling File Gateway?
The product itself wasn't very easy to comprehend. I required a lot of customization that didn’t meet my needs. I resolved more issues than IBM did. Sterling needs better testing for larger custome...
What is your primary use case for IBM Sterling File Gateway?
I utilized Sterling primarily for SFTP and Connect Direct. I have a complicated system involving ZOS mainframe, data power, and various complex rules as I was trying to replace everything with Ster...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Gwinnett County Public Schools, Evonik, Voith, BITMARCK, Oracle
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Aspera Managed File Transfer vs. IBM Sterling File Gateway and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,881 professionals have used our research since 2012.