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

BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer vs webMethods.io 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
7.1
Automating tasks reduced expenses, downtime, and labor needs, with significant time savings and positive returns outperforming competitors.
 

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
6.6
webMethods.io's customer service is responsive and helpful but occasionally slow for complex issues, with some variability in experiences.
BMC provides excellent service.
 

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
7.2
webMethods.io offers scalable solutions with easy cluster additions and CPU enhancements, though some challenges in connectors and on-premise setups exist.
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
7.7
webMethods.io is praised for its stability, reliability, and performance, with minimal downtime and effective long-term integration.
 

Room For Improvement

BMC Control-M needs improvements in scalability, cloud integration, GUI, support services, licensing, APIs, and administrative functions.
webMethods.io needs improved support, scalability, affordability, UI, logging, monitoring, version control, AI integration, and simplified processes.
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.
webMethods.io is seen as expensive but offers flexible licensing, making it suitable for larger businesses but costly for small firms.
 

Valuable Features

BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer offers automation, security, scalability, and integration features appreciated for enhancing workload efficiency and flexibility.
webMethods.io features efficient design, robust EDI, versatile integration, strong security, and flexible event-driven architecture for diverse applications.
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)
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
webMethods.io
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
91
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (4th), Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) (3rd), API Management (10th), Cloud Data Integration (9th), Integration Platform as a Service (iPaaS) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is 4.4%, down from 4.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of webMethods.io is 2.2%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

Shirish Kamalapurkar - PeerSpot reviewer
Good visibility for jobs and an easy-to-use dashboard for maintenance
The solution should improve the out-of-the box conversion tool for migrations so the percentage result isn't so low. We have many use cases where we migrate from different vendors like Otter. When we see the result for main frames, the percentage is low. A higher percentage would give us more confidence. We want to share good results with our customers. There is no option to deploy agents from Control-M itself so they have to be installed manually and that is time consuming. BMC does provide a separate tool to deploy the software but it would be easier to do from the solution's controller.
Michele Illiano - PeerSpot reviewer
Can function as an ESB along with the core product, with decent integration of message protocols
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. This is why, for most customers who have to deal with big files, I suggest that they use a product other than ActiveTransfer. I would like to note that this problem mainly concerns large files that undergo extra operations, such assigning, unassigning, or file translation. When these operations take place on large files, ActiveTransfer will use up a lot of resources. Within the product itself, I also believe that there is room for improvement in terms of optimization when it comes to general performance. I suspect that the issues underlying poor optimization are because it is all developed in Java. That is, all the objects and functions that are used need to be better organized, especially when it comes to big files but also overall. webMethods ActiveTransfer was born as an ESB to handle messages, and these messages were typically very short, i.e. small in size. A message is data that you have to send to an application, where it must be received in real-time and possibly processed or acknowledged elsewhere in the system as well. So, because it was initially designed for small messages, it struggles with performance when presented with very large files. All this to say, I suggest that they have an engineer reevaluate the architecture of the product in order to consider cases where large files are sent, and not only small ones. As for new features, compared to other products in the market, I think Software AG should be more up to date when it comes to extra protocol support, especially those protocols that other solutions have included in their products by default. Whenever we need to add an unsupported protocol, we have to go through the effort of custom development in order to work with it. Also, all the banks are obligated to migrate to the new standards, and big companies are all handling translations and operating their libraries with the new protocol formats. But webMethods ActiveTransfer doesn't seem to be keeping up with this evolution. Thus, they should aim to be more compliant in future, along the lines of their competitors such as IBM and Primeur.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 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
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Energy/Utilities 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?
There is not much room for improvement. It already has a GUI and even a mobile app, although I don't use it. It is adequate for most scheduling needs. Offering it as open source for free would be g...
What do you like most about Built.io Flow?
The tool helps us to streamline data integration. Its BPM is very strong and powerful. The solution helps us manage digital transformation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io is expensive. We have multiple components, and you need to pay for each of them.
What needs improvement with Built.io Flow?
webMethods.io needs to incorporate ChatGPT to enhance user experience. It can offer a customized user experience.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Built.io Flow, webMethods Integration Server, webMethods Trading Networks, webMethods ActiveTransfer, webMethods.io API
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

British Sky Broadcasting
Cisco, Agralogics, Dreamforce, Cables & Sensors, Sacramento Kings
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer vs. webMethods.io and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.