Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs AuraQuantic comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

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
Ranking in Process Automation
9th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
35
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (11th), Workload Automation (8th)
AuraQuantic
Ranking in Process Automation
18th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (19th), Low-Code Development Platforms (19th), No-Code Development Platforms (7th), Intelligent Document Processing (IDP) (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 0.6%, down from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of AuraQuantic is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Shubham Bharti - PeerSpot reviewer
Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation
Occasionally, I find myself contemplating if there is room for improvement in the user interface (UI), and envisioning that with certain enhancements. The UI could potentially offer a more refined and user-friendly experience, fostering smoother interactions and facilitating easier navigation for users engaging with the application. New users might encounter a minor setback due to the absence of readily accessible training videos, which could have otherwise proven to be an invaluable resource in aiding their initial familiarization with the platform, potentially hindering their seamless onboarding process and delaying their ability to harness the software's full range of capabilities to its utmost potential.
Emilio Valle - PeerSpot reviewer
Responsive support, easy to use, and reliable
It helped a lot when we started using it with more images. Before, it was basic. With images, it's more effective. Users consider it more animated and user-friendly. We can easily track a process and know exactly where a process is. It's a low-code application. The solution is very easy to use. It is stable and reliable. The solution scales well. Technical support is extremely responsive.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"I found ActiveBatch Workload Automation to be a very good scheduling tool. What I like best about it is that it has very less downtime when managing many complex scheduling workflows, so I'm very impressed with ActiveBatch Workload Automation."
"It has helped with scheduling complex jobs with simple scripts."
"The user interface is really incredible."
"By implementing a sophisticated scheduling mechanism, the system allows for the precise triggering of jobs at user-selected frequencies, enabling a seamless and automated execution of tasks according to specified time intervals."
"Approximately ~20 hours of manual effort have been reduced to ~5 hours with the help of ActiveBatch."
"ActiveBatch provides summary reports and logs for further analysis and improvements in monitoring servers, which is very handy."
"It can connect to a number of third-party/legacy systems."
"AuraPortal is very user-friendly and flexible."
"AuraPortal has the best price for its process."
"It's a low-code application."
"AuraQuantic's most valuable features are the zero code, user-friendly mode, and integration."
 

Cons

"Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referring to the documents."
"The thing I've noticed the most is the Help function. It's very difficult, at times, to find examples of how to do something. The Help function will explain what the tool does, but we're not a Windows shop at the data warehouse. Our data warehouse jobs actually run on Linux servers. Finding things for Linux-based solutions is not as easy as it is for Windows-based solutions. I would like to see more examples, and more non-Windows examples as well, in the Help."
"One thing I've noticed is that navigation can be difficult unless you are familiar with the structure that we have in place. If someone else had to look at our ActiveBatch console and find a job, they might not know where to find it."
"Some improvements can be made to the user interface."
"There are very few documents that provide us with detailed information on the troubleshooting of errors that occur during integration with the existing environment."
"They could provide an easier installation guide or technical support to the organizations during the installation process."
"The reporting needs improvement. There is a real need for the ability to generate audit reports on the fly. It needs to be a lot easier than what I can do right now. This is a major item for me."
"Except for the GUI, everything looks good."
"More documentation and the ability to extract different reports about different relations in the objects I use will help."
"We'd like it more animated. It would be useful if we could integrate GIFs, for example."
"One thing that could be improved would be for it to be deployed in a shorter time."
"AuraQuantic's price could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."
"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."
"Currently, we are paying approximately $7,000 yearly, which includes support."
"It allows for lower operational overhead."
"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."
"The price could be better. It's quite expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about ActiveBatch Workload Automation?
Managing the workload and monitoring the tasks were very difficult with manual interventions. Now, by using ActiveBatch, the process is automated and it runs tasks on a scheduled basis.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?
I'd advise users to start by knowing what the actual requirement is and thoroughly assess the automation needs. New users should take advantage of the demos and trial versions so they get an idea o...
What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?
After upgrades we are facing a few issues and errors triggered, so focusing on this would be appreciated. Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referrin...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

ActiveBatch
No data available
 

Overview

 

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
Nissan, RSA Chile, New Millennia Group Plc (UK), TOYOTA, ArcelorMittal Brasil, KPN, Farmacia Luis Corbi, Farmacia del Paseo, Frutas Bean, IncAE Business School, BDO Argentina, Refinery of the Pacific, Balfego Grup, Fundacion Seneca, Technological Institute Maranosa, Coprusa Group, Constructec, University of Deusto, Tenco Shopping Centers, Spanish Railways Foundation, Arbora & Ausonia.
Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. AuraQuantic and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.