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

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 183 Control-M reviews

21,647 Views
3,031 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: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

6.9

Number of Reviews

183

Ranking in other categories

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

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 solution offers good data recovery."

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

"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 feature we use most in Control-M is related to the file transfer module. It is quite advanced compared to the other tools like Automate, etc. The new version which has come of same MFT has a lot of advanced features which makes it very easy to work with. There is less need for written programs and more GUI-based stuff."

"It is very easy to use. The HA feature is also very good."

"The best features and what I appreciate about Control-M are the power of the tool, the ability to manage different applications, and to have a comprehensive overview of the production plan."

"The solution is stable."

"The most effective feature of Control-M is the API integration."

"I can say around twenty to twenty-five percent productivity increase has been realized, and even the margins have been increased, and I can see at least fifteen to twenty percent of the company's revenue has been increased at the infrastructure level by using Control-M."

"Control-M provides us with a unified view, where we can easily define, orchestrate, and monitor all our application workflows and data pipelines. It also provides the ability to filter. So, if I don't want to see everything, I can also narrow it down or open ViewPoint. This is very important since we have thousands of jobs to monitor. If we did not have this ability, it would be very difficult to see what is going on."

"After transitioning to Control-M, I have been very satisfied with it."

More Control-M pros

Cons

"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."

"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."

"One can opt for either a job-based license or a job execution-based license, which sometimes can be troublesome. If the job count exceeds a limit, you may need to procure additional licenses from BMC."

"The Control-M API does not support SQL database-type jobs, where a job has been configured to use the SQL catalog to locate SSIS."

"Control-M is not inexpensive. Looking at other tools in the market, they are offering competitive prices, but Control-M, as a BMC product, is definitely not inexpensive, and BMC could improve their pricing strategy."

"A lot of the areas of improvement revolve around Automation API because that area is constantly evolving. It is constantly changing, and it is constantly being updated. There are some bugs that are introduced from one version to the next. So, the regression testing doesn't seem to capture some of the bugs that have been fixed in prior versions, and those bugs are then reintroduced in later versions."

"I would like to see automatic license management. And probably more importantly, some kind of machine learning to help identify the optimum automation path."

"With earlier versions, the support was not accurate or delivered in a timely manner. What would happen is that I would be in production mode and I would have an issue and would want to get someone on a call to see what was happening. But they would always say, “Hey, provide the log first and then we'll review and we'll get back to you." I feel that when a customer asks about a production issue, they should jump onto the call to see what is going on, and then collect the logs."

"The solution lacks a graphical user interface for reporting."

"I would like to have a web version of Control-M to replace the client. Currently, our support and jobs-creation teams are using the client and that needs to be installed on a PC. It's very heavy, consuming a lot of resources compared to the web portal. I know that they're trying to improve the client with the latest version, but for me, there hasn't been enough improvement yet."

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 works on task-based licensing."

"The pricing of Control-M is reasonable."

"The license model is based on the number of tasks or jobs required. The price overall is expensive. In my country, we don't have any choice but to use them because no one can match their capability."

"The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."

"The license model is based on the number of jobs we run on the SaaS application or the number of executions, unlike the on-premise model options. If we have a handful of jobs, it's always good to consider Control-M, but if it's a large number of jobs, Control-M might not be a great option."

"Its pricing is a little bit high. They could provide an enterprise-level license for an unlimited number of jobs. Currently, it is based on the number of jobs, and if you exceed the number of jobs, there are charges. For example, if your license is for 3,000 jobs per day, but you run 3,050 jobs, you will have to pay for the extra 50 jobs. They charge $120 per job. So, it is too costly."

"One of the restrictions that we had was with some of the licensing, and not having any insight on the financials part of the product. I don't know what the licensing on the product is, but we don't have an unlimited enterprise license. So, there might be a limitation on either the cost of the licensing or the number of seats."

"I switched to this solution within the last year. I switched from the servers payment package to the job payment package, and it is very expensive."

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Computer Software Company

10%

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

27%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	37
Midsize Enterprise	23
Large Enterprise	140

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 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.

See all answers

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

From what I know about pricing, I would probably put Control-M in the expensive category, but you do pay for what you get; you are paying for a premium product.

See all answers

Comparisons

Kiteworks vs AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL]

Compared 84% 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

More AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] Competitors

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 13% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

January 2026

Download AWS Transfer for SFTP [EOL] product report

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

January 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 SaaS by BMC is tailored for growing teams, offering essential orchestration for managing hybrid cloud workflows starting at $29,000 annually.

Control-M integrates automation, orchestration, and a user-friendly interface to streamline workflows across banking, DevOps, and cloud environments. Key modules like Managed File Transfer and cross-platform support simplify job monitoring, while Batch Impact Manager enhances scheduling. Despite its capabilities, improvements in output analysis, reporting customization, offline access, and API integration are desired by users.

What are Control-M's key features?

Automation and Orchestration: Simplifies workflow management.
Integration: Connects with diverse applications seamlessly.
User Interface: Facilitates easy navigation.
Managed File Transfer: Streamlines secure file movements.
Self-Service: Empowers users to independently manage tasks.
Cross-Platform Support: Handles complex workflows efficiently.
Batch Impact Manager: Enhances scheduling and SLA management.
API Integration: Extends versatility across environments.

What benefits and ROI can users expect?

Increased Efficiency: Optimizes operations through automation.
Scalability: Supports enterprise growth and workload demands.
Improved SLA Management: Enhances reliability in scheduling.
Cost Savings: Streamlines processes to reduce operational costs.
Process Optimization: Ensures secure and efficient data exchanges.

Control-M is implemented in industries such as finance and enterprise operations, aiding in automating batch processing across platforms like SAP and Teradata. It integrates with secure file transfers, ERP systems, and databases, whether deployed on-premises or cloud, ensuring seamless operation optimization.

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)

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

881,082 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.