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

BMC Control-M 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
8.3
BMC Control-M MFT achieved ROI quickly, reducing costs and errors, and transitioned from mainframe to distributed systems efficiently.
Sentiment score
7.7
IBM Sterling File Gateway offers cost-effective, reliable file management for retail operations with user-friendly features and strong support.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.5
BMC Control-M support is praised for responsiveness but criticism exists for Level 2 expertise, with mixed feedback on Italian support.
Sentiment score
5.9
IBM Sterling File Gateway's support is responsive and reliable, despite occasional delays and complexity complaints; 24/7 availability is valued.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is scalable for large enterprises but faces licensing costs and high availability limitations.
Sentiment score
6.8
IBM Sterling File Gateway offers scalable, configurable solutions supporting large volumes and protocols, despite potential licensing and configuration constraints.
I have to pay per agent per server, which could be prohibitive for some organizations.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is reliable, stable, and enhanced by regular updates, ensuring high availability and robust performance.
Sentiment score
6.6
IBM Sterling File Gateway is generally stable, but can face performance issues with upgrades, high data volumes, and resource limits.
 

Room For Improvement

BMC Control-M needs improvements in scalability, cloud integration, GUI, support services, licensing, APIs, and administrative functions.
IBM Sterling File Gateway needs user interface enhancements, better stability, more storage support, and improved user management and licensing.
It is adequate for most scheduling needs.
 

Setup Cost

BMC Control-M MFT pricing is high, yet users value effectiveness and can negotiate discounts despite geographic cost variations.
IBM Sterling File Gateway offers secure file transfers, considered costly yet valuable, with varied pricing based on specifications.
 

Valuable Features

BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer offers automation, security, scalability, and integration features appreciated for enhancing workload efficiency and flexibility.
IBM Sterling File Gateway provides secure, adaptable file transfers with strong encryption, protocol support, user-friendly interface, and centralized management.
If I have a staff that operates Control-M on Windows Server, they will easily pick it up if they need to run it on Unix or mainframes. It's the same interface, saving time and improving efficiency.
 

Categories and Ranking

BMC Control-M Managed File ...
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
5th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
25
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 BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is 4.5%, down from 4.6% 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

Alan Arnold - PeerSpot reviewer
Stable, straightforward to deploy, and works as advertised
The most valuable thing is that it works as advertised. We don't take advantage of some of the features like we should because that's not our primary role and responsibility in the environment that we manage. We only want to make sure that a file gets to where it was supposed to go, or we pull in a file and it comes to us correctly. There are some GUI interfaces that we take a look at that tell us the number of transfers and the servers that are being utilized the most for capacity management and performance management. That's about it.
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.
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
31%
Computer Software Company
10%
Insurance Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer?
It is a highly scalable solution...I rate the product's initial setup a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer?
Negotiate based on task and ask for a better price where non prod tasks could be charged a lower price.
What needs improvement with BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer?
Most improvements are related to cloud connectivity. It would be beneficial to have cloud integration tools for services like AWS and Azure. Currently, batch flows integrate through modules but don...
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

British Sky Broadcasting
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer vs. IBM Sterling File Gateway and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,881 professionals have used our research since 2012.