We performed a comparison between Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer 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 feature is the automation engine, because it allows you to script or program and it has lots of different features and options. It's something like an IDE for programmers, where they can add variables, arrays, loops, et cetera."
"The Advanced Workflow Engine it comes with is brilliant because it allows us to create scripts and perform behind-the-scenes jobs that would otherwise require a third-party solution... You would have to create a special code on the outside to get all that other stuff done in the background. With Globalscape, we can get all of that done in one package."
"It made things easier. Before, there were five to 10 different software solutions spread out over 10 different servers. Now, everything is being centralized into one location; facilitating, supporting, maintaining, training people, etc. There have been gains just because Globalscape EFT is more efficient at moving things around than our previous other applications. For instance, if I am connecting to someone over the Internet or transmitting for the client, the speed of transmitting those files through SFTP is 20% to 30% faster than our previous automated solution. Therefore, we have seen time savings."
"It bolsters security with features like Data Loss Prevention and seamless integration with DLP for a safe and compliant environment which enables real-time document sharing and control over file actions."
"The High Security Module is valuable. It allows for increased security. It allows me to integrate Globalscape with our Active Directory. So, we manage all our customer accounts outside of Globalscape, and it allows us to import them with LDAP queries. It's very convenient. It also gives our customers the confidence that it's a very secure product."
"Its ease of use is most valuable. Especially for the configuration of the rules, we don't need to have any scripting knowledge. Previously, we used to have a lot of custom scripts to transfer these files. Now, it's all managed in one place, and it's like a self-service. It's saving a lot of time for us."
"The fact that it is Windows-based was a huge factor for us because most of our endpoints are Windows-based. And the ability to configure it means standardization is available with the product."
"The Event Rules functionality is a key feature. It is very simple to understand and work with. If you have a support team that doesn't know anything about coding, they can really relate to the way event rules are designed. So, I try to make them as simplistic as possible when we create file transmissions. When I first started working in Globalscape, a lot of the file transmissions were handled through Advanced Workflow, which is a similar product. We had a lot of scripts in Advanced Workflow. I moved them to Event Viewer in Globalscape because of the simplicity of building scripts and understanding how they work. It literally takes 5 to 10 minutes to set one up, but if you're in an advanced workflow, it could take an hour to two hours to understand via code what it is actually doing. It has definitely been a plus."
"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)."
"There are two ways to install Globalscape: as a standalone server or as a high-availability server, either Active-Active or Active-Standby. We are currently using standalone servers. That means if we want to upgrade the software, I shut down one of the two back-end servers, upgrade the software, make sure everything is correct, and then turn traffic back on to that one. I then proceed to upgrade the second server. With their high-availability solution, that is not a possibility. Both servers have to be shut down to perform the upgrade. We're a 24/7 shop. We don't have a window where we can have downtime."
"We need some capability for faster transfers and large file transfers. If we want to transfer a terabyte file, it is not capable of doing that right now. They say it is possible, but we are not able to do so with our environment."
"Instead of using a fat client to access the administrator panel, where you have to install client software on any server that you need to use to access, I would like them to switch to a web-based model where you could connect from anywhere without having to maintain and install the software."
"I do have some complaints or concerns around the centralized platform for the management of file transfer operations, and I know that they're working towards a better solution there. At its core, it's a good feature, but needs some improvements. I would like to see a web interface so that there is universal support across versions, because we have test and production environments that aren't always in sync. It would be nice to have one administrative interface to access both."
"It could improve its operations by incorporating real-time collaboration features like those offered by platforms such as Microsoft OneDrive and Office 365."
"In the beginning, it could be considered a bit challenging."
"The solution lags a bit when thousands of jobs, multiple users, and multiple developers are accessing it at the same time."
"Another area for improvement is the ARM (Auditing and Reporting Module) database, in terms of accuracy and the data being logged."
"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."
More Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is ranked 12th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 10 reviews while webMethods ActiveTransfer is ranked 17th in Managed File Transfer (MFT) with 2 reviews. Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is rated 8.4, while webMethods ActiveTransfer is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer writes "Rock solid, secure, and excellent price and quality of service". 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". Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer is most compared with MOVEit, WS_FTP Server, JSCAPE by Redwood, Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct and Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, whereas webMethods ActiveTransfer is most compared with Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT and Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer. See our Fortra's Globalscape Managed File Transfer 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.