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

IBM Sterling File Gateway vs Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct 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

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
Sterling Commerce Connect:D...
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
8th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
9
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 IBM Sterling File Gateway is 12.1%, up from 11.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is 8.5%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Sumit Mundik - PeerSpot reviewer
Has good file transfer speed, but licensing cost is too high
The initial setup of the solution is not straightforward because it's not GUI-based. If you are installing the solution on a UNIX server, you should have a basic understanding of UNIX. You should know how to go from one directory to another, what the config files are, how to edit those files, and how to get the backup of those files. You need a little technical knowledge for it. The developers working on the solution are very costly for the organization. Also, the complexity of having this kind of setup is very difficult. This solution is only used by giant financial companies like BNY Mellon, Barclays, and JPMorgan Chase. They cannot replace the solution because they have several files transferred internally using it. It is very difficult and cost-consuming for them to change, migrate, or upgrade their system. That's the reason they are not able to do it very easily.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I really like its offer of a system and business process that handles inbound and outbound transactions."
"I have found almost all the features valuable."
"It offers easy utilization of resources for smooth transfers."
"One feature that we appreciate or use for multiple customers is the routing channel."
"IBM Sterling File Gateway is user-friendly, allowing us to easily monitor and track file data."
"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."
"The most valuable aspect is that it has good functionality."
"It is a very flexible platform, and this flexibility is the best part of it."
"Security is the most valuable feature of this product."
"The product has been very stable."
"The most valuable feature of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is its flexibility with encryption."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is a solution that is on the market for a very long time. There is an integrator that has been developed and evolves every year. On the roadmap, there is always a new integration. For example, it's one of the solutions in the market that out of the box can handle EBICS protocol. The file processing is done very well. By default, there are a lot of configurations that can be customized."
"The most valuable feature is that it provides 100% reliability for file transmission. It ensures that files get delivered in a secure manner. When you use Connect:Direct, your file 100% gets delivered to the next delivery location. If the log shows that a file got delivered, it will have all the transmitted data without truncation or other data issues."
"Automation is the most valuable feature."
"The solution's file transfer speed is quite high."
"The Security Plus feature of this solution is excellent, and allows you to send encrypted files very securely to remote destinations."
 

Cons

"IBM is advising not to use the IT translate anymore but this is going to be an extra cost to the customer to use the alternative."
"Too many features; UI is not good."
"The number of failed files number increases with high workflow so that needs improvement."
"The API capabilities could be expanded to make integration more versatile."
"We have issues with the stability of this solution, like server-down issues."
"The product could be improved by offering native API capabilities and making the solution more user-friendly for larger, multi-node implementations."
"The solution should provide content or videos explaining to freshers how to configure it and what every field means."
"We need REST APIs or other tools to create that listening producer."
"They have File Agent, which is an additional utility and a component of Connect:Direct, for automated file transmission. In that utility, there is some issue with the file name. There is a limitation on the file name, and that is being fixed by IBM."
"Technical support is the number one concern."
"The initial setup could be simpler and better."
"The user interface could be more user-friendly."
"Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct could improve by adding some of the functionality that some other vendors have. For example, GoAnywhere has call agents, which are small clients that can be installed on the endpoints and can be handled by the central point on the server. If I want to do this with the IBM solution, I have to sell a lot of account addresses. The price could be unprofitable for the customer. There is some small functionality that could be implemented and could be easily done to improve this solution."
"The resources required for this tool are costly and not easily available in the market."
"Sometimes we face issues and can't figure out the cause of failures."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The solution's pricing is reasonable."
"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."
"It's reasonably priced at $800,000."
"The solution's licensing cost is too high."
"The price and licensing of Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct is expensive."
"Annual licensing fee."
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
36%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
44%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What needs improvement with Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct?
The package that IBM delivers does not come with many premade tools or templates. This means we have to create a lot of things by ourselves, which requires more work. We have a team of four to five...
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
HZMO, Bank of Communications
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Sterling File Gateway vs. Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,158 professionals have used our research since 2012.