Control-M vs TIBCO Managed File Transfer comparison

BMC and TIBCO are both solutions in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category. BMC is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.4, while TIBCO is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0. BMC holds a 4.6% mindshare in MFT, compared to TIBCO’s 2.1% mindshare. Additionally, 97% of BMC users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of TIBCO users who would recommend it.

Control-M

Read 134 Control-M reviews

19,859 Views
1,589 Comparison Views

97% willing to recommend

TIBCO Managed File Transfer

Read 3 TIBCO Managed File Transfer reviews

450 Views
446 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Control-M

TIBCO Managed File Transfer

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Control-M and TIBCO Managed File Transfer compete in file transfer and workload automation solutions. Control-M has an advantage in pricing and support, while TIBCO is preferred for its comprehensive features.

Features: Control-M includes automated batch processing, comprehensive scheduling, and robust workload management. TIBCO Managed File Transfer offers secure file transfer protocols, detailed auditing capabilities, and strong integration options, focusing on secure and reliable file transfers.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Control-M provides straightforward deployment supported by extensive documentation and responsive support. TIBCO Managed File Transfer offers more complex deployment with flexible options and substantial customer support.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M presents competitive setup costs with strong ROI, reducing manual intervention. TIBCO Managed File Transfer has a higher initial cost but offers robust security features and integration, delivering favorable ROI for secure data exchanges.

To learn more, read our detailed Control-M vs. TIBCO Managed File Transfer Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. TIBCO Managed File Transfer

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 868,787 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

Control-M

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

4th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

134

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (2nd), Workload Automation (1st)

TIBCO Managed File Transfer

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

14th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of Control-M is 4.6%, up from 3.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of TIBCO Managed File Transfer is 2.1%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Managed File Transfer (MFT) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Control-M	4.6%
TIBCO Managed File Transfer	2.1%
Other	93.3%

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

Featured Reviews

Mark_Francome

Senior System Specialist at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

Easily connects to different platforms and ties everything together in a centralized screen

Areas of Control-M that have room for improvement include the reporting feature. The reporting on Control-M hasn't changed much over the years, although it is in a different internal format. It used to be Crystal Reports, and now they've upgraded that. It would be better if that was really flexible where you could define your own reports. You can customize it a little bit, but when people come in with complex questions, you should be able to use that tool and access anything in the database. Control-M has two internal databases that are core to the product. You can go in and do your own SQL queries against the database, but this reporting tool should really be able to do everything that you can do with SQL, and give you good information. Instead, you end up having to export to spreadsheets and then change and update them. It can be very labor-intensive to get this information out. Other than the reporting, they've addressed most things over the years. Control-M is a tool that's been around for more than 30 years, so they have actually fixed most issues that you would encounter. They have a request for enhancement process that most users have sent requests to, but it doesn't move very quickly. The other challenge is they're supporting so many different platforms; BMC just wants it to be a trouble-free release. When users request new features, such as improved reporting, BMC's priority remains maintaining a clean-running system.

Read full review

Joshua Rule

Senior Integration Consultant at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

Serves as a straightforward SFTP server that offers reasonably good support

I think some of the automated deployment features could use some assistance, which is an area where it currently lacks. The product needs some ability to help it with the deployment model, which is a little difficult. Some support for the area revolving around PGP protocols in the product would be helpful. I think TIBCO could try to integrate better with API management software. TIBCO is a fairly solid product, but integration with some API management software should provide a better selling point since TIBCO would have some great API management capabilities.

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 best feature of Control-M is its orchestration capabilities for any orchestration that's required. Control-M has positively impacted my organization by helping with orchestrating complex tasks."

"The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced."

"The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on short notice."

"If they have ad hoc requirements, then they can theoretically schedule their own file transfers with the Self Service. We are trying to push as much work back to the customers or developers that have that requirement, because they prefer to help themselves, if possible. We try empowering them and enabling them through Control-M, especially for file transfers, because it is a much broader base of the business then just with batch scheduling. Typically, with SAP batch scheduling, it would work with dedicated teams. With file transfers, the entire business is involved. There are business users, end users, etc. It definitely needs to be as simple as possible and as managed as well as possible. They need to manage it themselves, if possible, because our team is not growing but the number of customers, applications, and jobs are growing. We need to hand back some of the responsibility to the customer for them to resolve and action it."

"We value Control-M mainly for the ability to control multiple nodes in a coordinated manner. Control-M has the ability to really coordinate across a lot of nodes."

"You can let users access the system and manage jobs: self-service."

"Control-M is excellent when it comes to building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows. Those workflows are of very high importance to our operations."

"By implementing automation tools, you can minimize human errors and improve efficiency."

More Control-M pros

"They have great multi-factor authentication for extra security."

"TIBCO has its own integration tool."

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to do centralized administration."

Cons

"Some of the features are not available. We were about to deploy the REST API, but we had some challenges. We had to use a third-party application. So, it should be improved in terms of integrating REST API jobs. That was something that was lacking. The customer was not that happy in terms of getting the desired output. So, we had to use a third-party application called Hangfire. We would like to have more videos on REST API integration, and we would like to have easy integration with the Control-M application through the REST API."

"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."

"The main area that could be improved would be documentation, just like every other software product out there!"

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

"For installing or upgrading the PeopleSoft and SAP plugins, currently there is no way to do it via Control-M Configuration Manager. So, we are installing or upgrading the plugins, like PeopleSoft and SAP, manually. If BMC could provide an option via Control-M Configuration Manager to upgrade these plugins, it probably would reduce a lot of manual work as well as ease our work. This is one improvement that I personally want to see, because it would help our way of working."

"Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support."

"I'm currently working on the SaaS version, but I've also worked on the on-prem versions before. There is a handful of features that haven't been added to the SaaS version, and the BMC knows that. It's a matter of time before they prioritize the missing pieces and bring them into the SaaS version."

"The community and the networking that goes on within that community need improvement. We want to be able to reach out to an SME, and say, "Hey, we are doing it this way. Does that make sense?" Ideally, they come back. and say, "Yes, it does make sense to do it that way. However, if you want to do it this way, then it is a little more efficient." We understand that one solution framework doesn't fit everybody. Depending on the breadth of the data and how broad it is, you may have different models for one over the other."

More Control-M cons

"Their cloud product is not yet stable."

"The UI could be better."

"I think some of the automated deployment features could use some assistance, which is an area where it currently lacks. The product needs some ability to help it with the deployment model, which is a little difficult."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing costs are around $3000 a year."

"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."

"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."

"We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing."

"This is an expensive product compared to other solutions, although I think that it is a good one. We are in a good position with licensing, as we can run 10,000 jobs."

"They are expensive. If we were a small company, it would be complicated because we have to have strong sales and operations to be able to afford a tool of this level. Being a large company, the cost-benefit is covered, but it is not within the level of cheap solutions."

"The annual licensing within BMC Control-M is on a per task basis. Three- and five-year contracts are also offered. The customer usually buys a bundle of tasks, e.g., 5,000 tasks, then my team configures Control-M for their usage."

"In our environment, pricing depends on the total number of maximum jobs that can run, which is fine. Therefore, if the number of jobs increases, then the licensing fees will increase."

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

"The price is very good for the complexity that the tool provides."

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

868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

26%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

28%

Insurance Company

Educational Organization

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	26
Midsize Enterprise	12
Large Enterprise	113

No data available

Questions from the Community

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?

Control-M is expensive and not cheap at all.

See all answers

What do you like most about TIBCO Managed File Transfer?

The most valuable feature of the solution is its ability to do centralized administration.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for TIBCO Managed File Transfer?

The price is very good for the complexity that the tool provides.

See all answers

What needs improvement with TIBCO Managed File Transfer?

See all answers

Comparisons

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 7% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

Rocket Zena vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

GoAnywhere MFT vs TIBCO Managed File Transfer

Compared 39% of the time

IBM Sterling File Gateway vs TIBCO Managed File Transfer

Compared 35% of the time

MOVEit vs TIBCO Managed File Transfer

Compared 15% of the time

More TIBCO Managed File Transfer Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

September 2025

Download Control-M product report

Buyer's Guide

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

August 2025

Download TIBCO Managed File Transfer product report

Also Known As

Control M

No data available

Interactive Demo

BMC

Demo not available

TIBCO

Overview

Control-M by BMC is engineered to manage hybrid cloud workflows, offering orchestration capabilities starting at $29,000 annually. Aimed at helping growing teams, it efficiently supports cross-environment scheduling and automation needs.

Control-M offers robust cross-platform scheduling, automation, and integration with applications such as SAP and Informatica. Users appreciate its ease of use with a graphical interface, centralized management, and monitoring capabilities. Advanced features, including Managed File Transfer, automated error handling, and real-time alerts, enhance productivity. The ability to unify workflows and support diverse environments makes Control-M a trusted tool in many sectors. While improvements in reporting flexibility and API integration with tools like ServiceNow are needed, addressing performance issues during upgrades could enhance its value. Offering improved support for new technologies and cloud environments is beneficial, with cost-effectiveness being a consideration.

What are the key features of Control-M?

Cross-Platform Scheduling: Facilitates seamless task management across various OS environments.
Automation: Provides efficient workflow automation for complex processes.
Third-Party Integration: Ensures smooth integration with applications like SAP and Informatica.
Graphical Interface: Simplifies job management and monitoring with user-friendly design.
Managed File Transfer: Enhances data transfer processes with structured handling.
Real-Time Alerts: Offers notifications for immediate response to workflow issues.

What benefits should organizations expect from Control-M?

Increased Efficiency: Streamlines operations and reduces manual workload.
Enhanced Productivity: Automation and monitoring features boost operational output.
Improved Compliance: Supports SLA achievement and regulatory requirements.
Operational Agility: Provides flexible and adaptable task management across platforms.

Control-M is leveraged in industries like finance for enterprise scheduling and data management, supporting mainframe, Linux, Unix, Windows, and cloud platforms. It contributes to workflow orchestration and workload automation, improving operational efficiency and enhancing IT infrastructure across those environments.

BMC

TIBCO MFT Platform Server enables an organization to control activities and securely transfer files on all major platforms throughout the enterprise. TIBCO MFT Platform Server is a solution for the following reasons: It supports all major platforms including Windows, UNIX (AIX, HP-UX, Solaris), Linux, z/Linux, iSeries, and IBM Mainframe. It offers a full range of encryption algorithms and built-in security and authentication options to secure any file transfer. It automates the process of file transfers and provides scheduling options and event-driven capabilities. With the TIBCO Accelerator acceleration technology, it makes the file transfers up to 30 times faster than FTP and other legacy systems.

TIBCO

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc

Endesa/Enel Group, Symantec, Visma Connect

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. TIBCO Managed File Transfer

September 2025

Free Report: Control-M vs. TIBCO Managed File Transfer

Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. TIBCO Managed File Transfer and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

868,787 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Control-M vs. TIBCO Managed File Transfer 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.