AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] vs ActiveBatch by Redwood comparison

ActiveBatch by Redwood and Amazon Web Services (AWS) are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. Additionally, 100% of ActiveBatch by Redwood users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 75% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users who would recommend it.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Read 37 ActiveBatch by Redwood reviews

2,534 Views
786 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Read 3 AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] reviews

75% willing to recommend

ActiveBatch by Redwood

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] and ActiveBatch by Redwood based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT).

To learn more, read our detailed Managed File Transfer (MFT) Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,733 peers since 2012

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

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (27th), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (14th), Workload Automation (14th)

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Featured Reviews

Abdul_Samad

Application Administrator Lead at Bluestem

Manages thousands of jobs daily and reduces downtime through secondary node support

The current feedback I receive from my end users regarding ActiveBatch by Redwood highlights issues with the tabs or panes during job modification. When the next user monitors it, they need to close the pane or job and reopen it to see the changes reflected. If the end user makes an update, it will not be visible unless they start from the beginning again. Implementing a refresh button would be helpful for real-time updates when the end user needs to see changes immediately. We currently face issues with the web console of ActiveBatch by Redwood. When users operate through an RDP session, every user has their own ActiveBatch by Redwood application. However, on the web console, users encounter daily activity issues where the job instances do not appear or update correctly, and they cannot view the latest logs. This issue is only present on the web console, as the application itself works without any problems. ActiveBatch by Redwood can be improved by adding more features, as we are not currently handling cloud-based applications like S3 buckets and Azure. Connecting to these cloud platforms would be a helpful enhancement.

Read full review

Kyle Titus

Chief Technology Officer at Revio

Always works, handles all types of load, and allows us to have S3 files as storage

Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops. There could be client software that you use to connect to the server. Generally, AWS doesn't provide one for you, so you have to use either your CLI, maybe your SSH CLI, or use some kind of desktop solution. I had to find a desktop app from a third party to run this. Our clients also do the same everywhere else, so it would be nice if the SFTP Gateway solution came with a client that anyone could download on their Mac, Windows, or any other machine.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The nice thing about ActiveBatch is once we have created a specific job that can be easily be replicated to another job, then minimal changes will have to be made. This makes things nice. Reduction of coding is substantial in a lot of cases. The replication of one job to another is just doing a few minor tweaks and rolling it into production. This decreases our development costs substantially."

"Approximately ~20 hours of manual effort have been reduced to ~5 hours with the help of ActiveBatch."

"Since I started using this product, I have been able to easily track everything as it mainly monitors, alerts, and looks after all the services - even across platform scheduling - which has helped me immensely."

"Since we are no longer waiting for an operator to see that a job is finished, we have changed our daily cycle from running in eight hours down to about five. We had a third shift-operator retire and that position was never refilled."

"Easy to configure and simple to develop new features."

"The best feature that ActiveBatch by Redwood offers is the user interface."

"Using this tool, if there are any huge failures, we immediately get an email notification, and the proper team will be informed, at which time they can act accordingly."

"One of the valuable features is the ability to trigger workflows, one after another, based on success, without having to worry about overlapping workflows. The ability to integrate our BI, analytics, and our data quality jobs is also valuable"

More ActiveBatch by Redwood pros

"Being able to have the S3 files as storage is most valuable. We can use S3 as storage instead of an SFTP server or a machine."

"The solution offers good data recovery."

"The solution has helped with collaboration in our organization."

Cons

"I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized."

"It could be easier to provide dashboards on how many jobs are running at the same time; more monitoring."

"As more organizations are moving towards a cloud-based infrastructure, ActiveBatch could incorporate more capabilities that support popular cloud platforms, such as AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud."

"Between version 10 and version 12 there was a change. In version 10, they had each object in its own folder. But on the back end, they saw it at the root level. So when we moved over to version 12, everything was in the same area mixed together. It was incredibly difficult and we actually had to create our own folders and move those objects—like schedules, jobs, user accounts—and manually put those into folders, whereas the previous version already had it."

"There are some issues with this version and finding the jobs that it ran. If you're looking at 1,000 different jobs, it shows based on the execution time, not necessarily the run time. So, if there was a constraint waiting, you may be looking for it in the wrong time frame. Plus, with thousands of jobs showing up and the way it pages output jobs, sometimes you end up with multiple pages on the screen, then you have to go through to find the specific job you're looking for. On the opposite side, you can limit the daily activity screen to show only jobs that failed or jobs currently running, which will shrink that back down. However, we have operators who are looking at the whole nightly cycle to make sure everything is there and make sure nothing got blocked or was waiting. Sometimes, they have a hard time finding every item within the list."

"The documentation is very limited, and it can be improved."

"Any product is going to have some room for improvement, no matter what. I see the company has already ventured into AWS and they're constantly trying to improve the managed file transfer which they have recently improvised. I think they bought a software called JSCAPE and they're trying to improve it, which is good. I am not sure if JSCAPE would be part of the base product but currently, you have to buy a separate license for it, which doesn't make sense. If it was Microsoft, ServiceNow, or integrating with other software vendors, I would understand but JSCAPE is now in-house and I'm not sure if they can justify having a separate license for JSCAPE. I would probably expect them to be packaging JSCAPE into the base product. They did switch over from a perpetual license model to a subscription model, which hurt the company a little bit. Nobody is offering the perpetual model anymore. As long as the transition is fair for both the companies, I think it should be fine and not burn us out."

"I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood cons

"The tool's UI should be pretty easy and straightforward. I would also like to see a simple audit report of the SFTP guest account that shows the amount of data transfers and security kind enabled."

"Could be more automated, particularly for file transfers."

"Its cost needs improvement. In addition, there could be a universal client that works on all desktops."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."

"It allows for lower operational overhead."

"Currently, we are paying approximately $7,000 yearly, which includes support."

"ActiveBatch is currently redesigning themselves. In the past, they were a low cost solution for automation. They had a nice tool that was very inexpensive. With their five-year plan, they will be more enhancement-driven, so they're trying to improve their software, customer service, and the way that their customers get information from them. In doing that, they're raising the price of their base system. They changed from one pricing model to another, which has caused some friction between ActiveBatch and us. We're working through that right now with them. That's one of the reasons why we're why we were evaluating other software packages."

"I like ActiveBatch Workload Automation's licensing model because they're not holding you down on an agentless model or agent model, where every server needs to have an agent. That's the main selling point of the solution and I hope they stay that way."

"I don't think we've ever had a problem with the pricing or licensing. Even the maintenance fees are very much in line. They are not excessive. I think for the support that you get, you get a good value for your money. It's the best value on the market."

"If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."

"The pricing was fair. There are additional costs for the plugins. We have the standard licensing fees for different pieces, then we have the plugins which were add-ons. However, we expected that."

"It's $249 per month per instance. It's not great; it's pretty pricey. We've got multiple users on that one instance. If we had to build it by hand, we would win on cost there, but obviously, there is effort and time. In terms of the additional costs, they do have some specific pricing, but for our use case, we don't end up going over $249. They do specify in their pricing what they're charging for."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Insurance Company

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

21%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	47

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ActiveBatch by Redwood has been great; we recently renewed our license, and it was a smooth process without any issues.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

My main use case for ActiveBatch by Redwood is file processing. I use ActiveBatch by Redwood for file processing for debit card transactions.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Control-M vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 16% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 11% of the time

Stonebranch vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 9% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 8% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 7% of the time

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Competitors

Kiteworks vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 75% of the time

Control-M vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 7% of the time

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 5% of the time

MOVEit vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

IBM Sterling File Gateway vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 4% of the time

More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood

February 2026

Download ActiveBatch by Redwood product report

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] product report

Also Known As

ActiveBatch

No data available

Overview

ActiveBatch by Redwood enhances efficiency with features like job scheduling, integration, and real-time monitoring. It supports diverse platforms, automates tasks, and offers a single-pane view with robust security.

ActiveBatch streamlines automation by offering drag-and-drop functionality, pre-built job steps, and native integrations. Its customizable workflows and alert system aid in managing complex workloads like data processing and server monitoring across hybrid environments. While it effectively reduces manual errors and enhances productivity, areas like navigation and support for cloud platforms need enhancement. New users may face challenges due to its complexity and steep learning curve, and further improvements in reporting, mobile access, and training could provide additional support to users.

What important features does ActiveBatch offer?

Comprehensive Job Scheduling: Manages and automates complex workloads efficiently.
Integration Capabilities: Seamlessly connects with different platforms and applications.
Real-time Monitoring: Offers a single-pane view for quick issue identification.
Customizable Workflows: Tailors processes to specific organizational tasks.
Robust Alert System: Ensures timely notifications for critical events.
Data Protection: Incorporates strong security measures for secure operations.

What benefits should be considered when evaluating ActiveBatch?

Enhanced Efficiency: Automates repetitive tasks, reducing manual intervention.
Improved Productivity: Streamlines processes across hybrid environments.
Error Reduction: Decreases likelihood of manual errors.
Platform Support: Provides integration with diverse systems.

In finance, ActiveBatch is implemented for orchestrating batch processes and data management. The healthcare industry utilizes it for automating patient data updates and server monitoring, while the retail sector benefits from file transfers and inventory management automation.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

AWS Transfer for SFTP is a fully managed service that enables the transfer of files directly into and out of Amazon S3 using the Secure File Transfer Protocol (SFTP)—also known as Secure Shell (SSH) File Transfer Protocol.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Sample Customers

Informatica, D&H, ACES, PrimeSource, Sub-Zero Group, SThree, Lamar Advertising, Subway, Xcel Energy, Ignite Technologies, Whataburger, Jyske Bank, Omaha Children's Hospital

Myriota, FINRA, Celgene, Kontor New Media, Belong, ThinkCX, BluTV

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.