AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] vs Control-M comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and BMC are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. Additionally, 75% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 98% of BMC users who would recommend it.

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Read 3 AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] reviews

75% willing to recommend

Control-M

Read 237 Control-M reviews

31,544 Views
5,993 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Control-M

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 13, 2026

Control-M and AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] are competing products in the secure file transfer market. AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] appears to have the upper hand due to its seamless integration with AWS services, while Control-M is preferred for its comprehensive scheduling and workflow automation.

Features: Control-M includes advanced scheduling, robust automation, and detailed monitoring, effectively supporting complex workflows. AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] provides secure transfers, simple operations, and elastic capabilities with seamless AWS ecosystem integration.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] offers effortless cloud deployment with straightforward AWS management interfaces and strong support. Control-M, typically on-premises, may require more extensive setup and ongoing support, making its process more intricate.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M generally involves higher setup costs but offers potential significant ROI in advanced capability environments. AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] uses a pay-as-you-go model, possibly providing faster ROI for AWS-invested businesses, with flexible pricing as a cost-effective alternative.

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

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 913,683 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

AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Control-M

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

237

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (2nd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (2nd)

Featured Reviews

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

Raj Pattni

Batch Admin at NBC Universal

Brings data together from multiple platforms and optimizes cross-environment orchestration

The features of Control-M that I like the most include the ability to easily integrate or bring in different platforms into Control-M. For instance, AWS, mainframe, TWS, and something that's running on Autosys can all be brought into Control-M, converted to how Control-M runs it, and then the batch can be executed. This centralizes various applications in Control-M, which doesn't just have to handle batch processes, but also other tasks like reporting on required data. I find this functionality very useful and the setup is impressive, with more advancements yet to come. With Control-M, my company has achieved several measurable improvements since I started. The metrics indicate that the number of failures has dropped, and we have addressed the issue of excessive false alerts that I encountered when I joined. Previously, we received an overwhelming number of alerts daily, but now we manage to maintain that at a normalized level, perhaps around five to fifteen alerts, depending on running core batches and their setup.

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 most valuable feature for us is data persistence, because it basically gives you a snapshot history and the solution also offers good data recovery."

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

"The solution offers good data recovery."

"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."

"With version 9, there is out-of-the-box automatic failover (high availability), as well as the new agent deployment tool."

"Without Control-M, I don't know where we'd be, and if we shut it off, the business would probably run for about six hours before we faced serious issues, highlighting its role as a key component to our success."

"Since our decision to migrate to Control-M, our customers have been very satisfied."

"For top 100 enterprises, there isn't another better tool on the market for enterprise."

"The File Transfer component is quite valuable. The integration with products such as Informatica and SAP are very valuable to us as well. Rather than having to build our own interface into those products, we can use the ones that come out of the box. The integration with databases is valuable as well. We use database jobs quite a bit."

"Control-M is a very robust solution."

"We are using Control-M for day-to-day operations only. It is helpful for us in our day-to-day operations. It is a key in our financial sector. We are automating via Control-M in our treasury operations, including any evening updates. Control-M makes things easier and faster by helping our treasury operations go without any interruptions."

"Control-M is the center for all of the applications, where it acts as the mediator between the application and the servers."

More Control-M pros

Cons

"SFTP would be better if it was more automated, particularly for file transfers."

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

"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."

"The reporting tool still needs a lot of improvement. It was supposed to get better with the upgrade, and it really didn't get better. It needs help, because it's such a useful thing to have. It needs to be more powerful and easier to use."

"Pricing for Control-M is on the costlier side when it comes to SaaS pricing."

"The pricing of Control-M is a bit on the higher end, compared to any other tools that we have seen."

"The next major release needs to focus on the lightweight web client."

"I believe Control-M can be improved as there is news about shutting down its GUI; I believe the GUI is more impactful than the web version, so continuing to use the GUI would be more useful."

"Control-M is really good for legacy, corporate enterprise but less optimal for modern, open source environments."

"The user interface is not that good."

"Advanced File Transfer (AFT) has limitations that cause us to use a bit more licensing than we feel is appropriate."

More Control-M cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"It is an expensive solution."

"This is an area where it is a little difficult to work with BMC. They want to do licenses by job, which is what we have. For example, the simplest is to license by job, but they can also license by nodes. While the licensing is simple to use, it might not be the correct licensing model for the customer. It is okay because we want to license by job, which is something measurable. At the end of the day, licensing by job is the most important."

"I rate the solution's price a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is low or really affordable, and ten is high or really expensive. It is a really expensive tool."

"Initially, our licensing model was based on the number of jobs per day. That caused some issues because we were restricted to a number. So at our renewal time we said, 'We want to convert from number of jobs to number of endpoints.' That cost us extra money but it gave us additional capabilities, without worrying about the number of jobs."

"There are two different types of licenses available. The first is based on the number of jobs that we run per day, and the other is based on the number of agents that we install. My current project has a contract for five years."

"We have a license till 2024. We are good and satisfied with it."

"BMC does NOT have a great licensing model from my perspective."

"We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost."

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

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

913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Performing Arts

11%

Manufacturing Company

Comms Service Provider

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

23%

Outsourcing Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	44
Midsize Enterprise	32
Large Enterprise	194

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?

Control-M sits at the premium end of workload automation pricing — that is no secret, and I will not pretend otherwise. My position after decades of using it: the enterprise value justifies the pre...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Control-M?

My main improvement point after decades with the product is not a feature — it is the path to mastery. Basic administration of Control-M is fairly accessible: a new person can define and monitor jo...

See all answers

Comparisons

Kiteworks vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 21% of the time

GoAnywhere MFT vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 9% of the time

SEEBURGER Business Integration Suite vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 8% of the time

Globalscape EFT vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 8% of the time

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

Compared 7% of the time

More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Competitors

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 4% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 4% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 3% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

September 2026

Download AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

September 2026

Download Control-M product report

Also Known As

No data available

Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

BMC

Overview

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)

Control-M, from BMC, provides robust orchestration capabilities for managing hybrid cloud workflows, available both on-premise and as a SaaS option. Control-M from BMC supports growing teams in automating and scheduling enterprise workload processes. Control-M serves as a versatile tool for businesses, enabling automation across diverse platforms like SAP, mainframes, and cloud environments. It simplifies job scheduling with an intuitive GUI and integrates with multiple applications and platforms. Users benefit from managed file transfers, role-based administration, and self-service portals, enhancing security and workflow management. While the platform offers comprehensive alerting, reporting, and batch impact management, feedback has highlighted areas for improvement such as more flexible job execution, enhanced reporting capabilities, and better integration with third-party tools. Additionally, licensing costs and support during upgrades are common concerns. Organizations value Control-M for its ability to facilitate secure file transfers and support business-critical operations, minimizing manual intervention and ensuring efficiency.

What are the key features of Control-M?

Automation Capabilities: Control-M automates and orchestrates workflows seamlessly across platforms.
Integration: It works with multiple applications and environments for enhanced connectivity.
Intuitive GUI: Simplifies scheduling, monitoring, and management of jobs with ease.
Managed File Transfer: Securely facilitates and manages file transfers.
Cross-Platform Support: Ensures seamless operations across various systems like SAP and mainframes.

What benefits should you look for in Control-M reviews?

Operational Reliability: Improves efficiency and SLA compliance with reliable performance.
User Autonomy: Allows self-service for various users, enhancing independence.
Security: Strengthens security with advanced administration and file management.
Cost-Effectiveness: Provides orchestrated solutions with cost considerations.
Enhanced Efficiency: Reduces manual tasks, allowing teams to focus on strategic goals.

Control-M is instrumental in industries managing complex workflows and IT operations. In finance, it offers accurate real-time data processing. Supply chain sectors benefit from its orchestration capabilities to streamline operations and minimize disruption. IT departments leverage integration capabilities to optimize workflow processes, ensuring seamless application management.

BMC

Sample Customers

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

The Bank of East Asia, LINE Bank Taiwan, Coop, Air Europa, Carrefour, Itau Unibanco, Snam, Embraer, ANZ Bank, EDP, Dominio's, Tampa General Hospital, W&W Informatik GmbH, Veterans General, Up Sí Vale, Sky Italia, REWE digital GmbH, Raymond James, Railinc, Navistar, Management Science Associates, Colruyt, CARFAX, Banpara, Aspiag Service, Amadeus, AG Insurance, ING Bank Slaski

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

September 2026

Download Free Report

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

913,683 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.