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

Control-M 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
7.4
Control-M boosts efficiency and reduces costs with enhanced productivity, centralized job management, and improved data handling for enterprises.
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
7.4
Control-M support is praised for responsiveness and expertise, despite occasional response delays and challenges with ticketing and documentation.
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.
They do not always provide timely support.
Solutions are available on the web.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Control-M offers excellent scalability and adaptability, efficiently handling significant workloads across diverse IT environments for enterprise growth.
Sentiment score
6.8
IBM Sterling File Gateway offers scalable, configurable solutions supporting large volumes and protocols, despite potential licensing and configuration constraints.
As the workload on Control-M increases, its scalability is much higher.
It can absorb more workload wherever needed.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Control-M is praised for its stability, reliability, and improved performance, crucial for handling complex, high-volume operations efficiently.
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

Control-M needs enhanced reporting, flexibility, automation, integration, reduced costs, and a user-friendly web-based interface for improved usability.
IBM Sterling File Gateway needs user interface enhancements, better stability, more storage support, and improved user management and licensing.
There should be an automation system for developers to set it up more easily and quickly.
The UI can be challenging for new users due to its learning curve.
 

Setup Cost

Control-M pricing is costly for small enterprises but seen as valuable by larger ones due to its features.
IBM Sterling File Gateway offers secure file transfers, considered costly yet valuable, with varied pricing based on specifications.
Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more.
 

Valuable Features

Control-M excels in user-friendly automation, integration, and scheduling, enhancing workflow efficiency and reliability across diverse applications.
IBM Sterling File Gateway provides secure, adaptable file transfers with strong encryption, protocol support, user-friendly interface, and centralized management.
Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.
It is integrated into our CI/CD pipeline.
 

Categories and Ranking

Control-M
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
4th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (3rd), Workload Automation (1st)
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 Control-M is 4.4%, up from 2.9% 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

Pedro Fuentes - PeerSpot reviewer
Cost-effective, excellent support, and centralized access and control
They have a department that handles requests for enhancements. I talked to Control-M guys back in October or November when they had a gathering here in Atlanta. We talked about not being able to go back in history in Helix Control-M for more than two weeks. We submitted a request for enhancement. They told us that they are working on it, and they are thinking of expanding that to 30 days. We would like to see it expand to 90 days, but they are working on it. In Control-M, we were able to go back 180 days, but that was on-prem. The storage of that data was on our own servers. We know that storage is money, and we do not expect them to store that much of the data, but at least 30 to 60 days seem proper.
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.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
36%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

How does Control-M compare with AutoSys Workload Automation?
Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and th...
What do you like most about Control-M?
First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more.
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...
 

Also Known As

Control M
No data available
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. IBM Sterling File Gateway and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.