JSCAPE by Redwood vs Kiteworks comparison

Read 13 Kiteworks reviews

3,236 Views
1,909 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

JSCAPE by Redwood

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

Kiteworks and JSCAPE by Redwood compete in secure file transfer and data protection. Kiteworks has an edge in pricing and support, while JSCAPE by Redwood stands out with robust features that make it a potentially better overall option despite higher costs.

Features: Kiteworks provides advanced threat protection, compliance tracking, and integration capabilities, simplifying secure data management. JSCAPE by Redwood offers robust automation features, extensive protocol support, and customizable workflows, making it suitable for complex environments needing comprehensive solutions.

Room for Improvement: Kiteworks could enhance its automation features, offer more protocol support, and improve workflow customization. JSCAPE by Redwood might benefit from streamlining its initial configuration process, offering more cost-effective pricing options, and simplifying user interface elements to attract a broader audience.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiteworks offers a straightforward deployment process with extensive documentation and reliable support, appealing to organizations seeking rapid implementation. JSCAPE by Redwood provides a flexible deployment model with dedicated support, fitting diverse infrastructural needs while requiring a bit more initial setup effort.

Pricing and ROI: Kiteworks is favored for its reasonable setup costs, delivering solid ROI through efficient operations. JSCAPE by Redwood, with its higher initial investment, is seen as worthwhile due to advanced functionalities offering potential long-term gains. Kiteworks serves as a cost-effective solution for immediate returns, whereas JSCAPE by Redwood is a strategic investment for future growth.

To learn more, read our detailed JSCAPE by Redwood vs. Kiteworks Report (Updated: February 2026).

JSCAPE by Redwood vs. Kiteworks

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,707 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

JSCAPE by Redwood

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

13th

Average Rating

9.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Kiteworks

Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)

5th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Content Management (16th), Email Security (29th), Content Collaboration Platforms (13th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (10th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of JSCAPE by Redwood is 4.2%, up from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiteworks is 6.1%, down from 9.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Managed File Transfer (MFT) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Kiteworks	6.1%
JSCAPE by Redwood	4.2%
Other	89.7%

Managed File Transfer (MFT)

Featured Reviews

Akshatha Ramesh

Junior Business Analyst at EFI

Good automation, no complex coding, and high-level data encryption

When it comes to performance and scalability, JSCAPE is a highly reliable software, however, I would suggest a few improvements: 1. The documentation needs a revamp for a better understanding of the features of the tool. 2. Customer service can be offered on call or chat. 3. The initial setup is time-consuming; it could use a video tutorial. 4. UI can be improved in terms of look and feel. 5. Documentation should be provided for a majority of newly released features as these can be difficult for a layman to use without proper instructions.

Read full review

KishoreT-Review

Associate Consultant at a tech consulting company with 10,001+ employees

Streamlined global file sharing with user-friendly interface and self-service capabilities

I'm not a network expert, however, there must be some room for improvement. Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss. If users receive such notifications, they can understand any disruptions are due to issues with their network or bandwidth rather than the site or Kiteworks. Additionally, I work from offshore India, and I told my client manager to communicate with the Kiteworks forum salesman regarding one feature. I noticed the Kiteworks login UI is very basic, lacking customization. Allowing more HTML tags to add hyperlinks or user-friendly information on the home page would be very useful.

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

"It is platform-independent and can flawlessly work on any operating system using the latest security standards."

"The JSCAPE MFT Server offers support for diverse protocols such as FTP(S), SFTP, SCP, AFTP, OFTP, and TFPT."

"The user-friendly interface has made it easy for fresh users to adopt it."

"The product's most valuable feature is the high availability clustering."

"JSCAPE's automation can obliterate manual file transfer processes, salvaging precious time and vanquishing the chances of errors."

"Triggers are also something that is useful as they automate the use of boilerplate code."

"It is easy to transfer large sets of files."

"We can send the data quickly and securely."

More JSCAPE by Redwood pros

"I can identify from which region our users are uploading or downloading files."

"Scalability is impressive."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth."

"The solution removes the limitations with file attachment size that is found with regular email."

"We can see when people are sending things. We can definitely see who is sending to whom. From the administrative logs, we can see who is sending to an outside entity, and those logs are retained for quite a while."

"The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files."

"The most valuable aspect of Kiteworks is undoubtedly the private content network. This feature is particularly beneficial for us. Furthermore, it serves as a centralized platform that enables us to track and manage our information exchange."

"The best part of this solution is that we can generate multiple reports about how the data is transferred and about user information or IP."

More Kiteworks pros

Cons

"The JSCAPE team could create detailed documents or blogs on how to troubleshoot certain errors that come over in integration with existing environment tools."

"They could create an in-depth document so that any user with little to no background can implement this and use the software effectively."

"Setup is time-consuming."

"The user interface is something that has to be worked on."

"With constant software releases and updates, detailed notifications and documentation on the improvements along with the comparison of the past and present features would be helpful to understand and use it better."

"The initial setup and configuration are time-consuming."

"Iteratively enhancing the user interface could help with streamlining workflows to make them more intuitive and user-friendly."

"The user interface (UI) could be improved."

More JSCAPE by Redwood cons

"I noticed the Kiteworks login UI is very basic, lacking customization. Allowing more HTML tags to add hyperlinks or user-friendly information on the home page would be very useful."

"It could be more stable. In the next release, it would be better if it was more stable with improved performance."

"There are always issues when there are bugs or upgrades. The challenge with upgrading is getting more storage from the customer. Every time we have a new version, it requires additional storage. This means that the customer would need to procure more storage for their server, which they don't like because it means additional cost to them. So, I think my request would be that the version upgrades don't require any significant storage requirement."

"In my experience, their technical support can be a little slow."

"We have experienced a few hiccups and bugs when using the admin console and from a user perspective."

"Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss."

"File location could be improved."

"There is no offboarding process for end-users in Kiteworks. It's a manual process. There is no automated syncing with LDAP and checking to see if the account is still active. It's a manual process to get people out of here, which isn't the best way."

More Kiteworks cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The software is expensive compared to other vendors."

"The solution is very expensive because we are buying with Malaysian Ringgit and it's sold in US dollars."

"They changed it midstream. We were being charged a certain flat rate for SFTP traffic. For whatever reason, at the beginning of the year, our pricing changed, and we are now being charged more for using a feature of the product than we were when we first bought it. That has been our experience with billing. It turned out to be more expensive than when we started with it."

"The price of Kiteworks is reasonable."

"The license management is changing and confusing. If I could make one change to it, it would be better license management through the API."

"It is not really expensive. I mean, to me it's obviously expensive, but it's worth it."

"I believe it's a little costly, but given the faith that we put into it from a security perspective to maintain the integrity of our patient information that is being transferred through this system, that's a small price to pay. So, on the surface, it might look like a lot of money, but depending on the need for security, which is where we feel it shines, it's okay price-wise."

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

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Performing Arts

Government

13%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Healthcare Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	4
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	35

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Large Enterprise	11

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JSCAPE?

I rate the product’s pricing a three out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

What needs improvement with JSCAPE?

JSCAPE ensures data integrity. You know that the file has been transferred and on which date, as we provide timestamps. We handle cybersecurity ourselves with proprietary technologies for the netwo...

What is your primary use case for JSCAPE?

We selected JSCAPE because they have a viable product for our network service delivery. In the medical profession, people need to move files around within the industry. In manufacturing, a lot of d...

What is Kiteworks?

Kiteworks is a secured file sharing platform that enables users to collaborate with different parties across a robust offering of secured protected channels. Users have the option of virtual privat...

What needs improvement with Kiteworks?

What advice do you have for others considering Kiteworks?

Scalability is impressive. It can be highly available, resilient, and scalable infrastructure. I can confidently give it a nine. It suits any level of organization, whether a small setup with two a...

GoAnywhere MFT vs JSCAPE by Redwood

Comparisons

Compared 36% of the time

MOVEit vs JSCAPE by Redwood

Compared 32% of the time

Axway AMPLIFY Managed File Transfer vs JSCAPE by Redwood

Compared 7% of the time

Globalscape EFT vs JSCAPE by Redwood

Compared 6% of the time

Control-M vs JSCAPE by Redwood

Compared 5% of the time

More JSCAPE by Redwood Competitors

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs Kiteworks

Compared 13% of the time

GoAnywhere MFT vs Kiteworks

Compared 8% of the time

SharePoint vs Kiteworks

Compared 8% of the time

Hygraph vs Kiteworks

Compared 7% of the time

SolarWinds Serv-U Managed File Transfer Server vs Kiteworks

Compared 3% of the time

More Kiteworks Competitors

Product Reports

Download JSCAPE by Redwood product report

JSCAPE by Redwood

January 2026

Download Kiteworks product report

January 2026

Also Known As

No data available

Accellion

Overview

JSCAPE platform offers independent managed file transfer (MFT) software that allows users to secure and automate data exchange with trading partners, clients and internal transfers. Built-in security features and audit functions support PCI DSS, HIPAA, GLBA and Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. SaaS (MFTaaS) offering available.

Redwood Software

Kiteworks empowers organizations to effectively manage risk in every send, share, receive, and save of sensitive content over numerous communications channels: email, file sharing, managed file transfer, APIs, and web forms. The Kiteworks platform unifies, tracks, controls, and secures sensitive content moving within, into, and out of an organization, significantly improving risk management and ensuring regulatory compliance.

Sample Customers

BAE Systems, ABN AMRO, Boeing, Bank of America, Dassault Falcon Jet Corp, Bank of Montreal, General Dynamics, Bank of Taiwan, General Electric, Citibank Canada, Honeywell, CreditSuisse, L-3 Communications, Columbia University, Harvard Medical School, Kaplan Higher Education, Northwest Christian College, Kaiser Permanente, Share Builder, Procter & Gamble, TransUnion, Roche Diagnostics, BASF, 1-800-Contacts, Canon, AMPM, Daimler AG, Coach, Edwards Brothers, USB Financial Services

United States Securities and Exchange Commission, National Health Service, Husch Blackwell LLP, NYC Health + Hospitals, Viatris, MITRE Corporation, Chubb, Kraft Heinz, KPMG, Kohler, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Purdue Pharma, AVL