ActiveBatch by Redwood vs IBM Cloud Pak for Automation comparison

ActiveBatch by Redwood and IBM are both solutions in the Process Automation category. ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked #27 with an average rating of 7.5, while IBM is ranked #38. ActiveBatch by Redwood holds a 1.1% mindshare in PA, compared to IBM’s 1.1% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of ActiveBatch by Redwood users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of IBM users who would recommend it.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Read 37 ActiveBatch by Redwood reviews

2,534 Views
760 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Read 2 IBM Cloud Pak for Automation reviews

545 Views
501 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

ActiveBatch by Redwood

IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

ActiveBatch by Redwood and IBM Cloud Pak for Automation are competing in the workflow automation solutions category. ActiveBatch by Redwood has a lead in terms of ease of use and customer support, while IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is noted for its extensive feature set and scalability, potentially justifying its higher price point.

Features: ActiveBatch by Redwood provides seamless integration with various applications, making it user-friendly for business process automation. It supports diverse triggers and offers expansive scheduling options. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation provides AI-driven capabilities, extensive analytics, and flexible deployment options, allowing for more complex automation tasks.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: ActiveBatch by Redwood features a straightforward deployment process, supported by reliable customer service, facilitating easy implementation across varied environments. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation requires a more complex setup but provides extensive resources and dedicated support to aid deployment, suited for large-scale implementations.

Pricing and ROI: ActiveBatch by Redwood is often viewed as more cost-effective with quicker ROI due to lower initial costs. In contrast, IBM Cloud Pak for Automation has higher setup costs, with a promising long-term ROI for organizations needing advanced functionalities, willing to invest in a robust solution.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,757 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

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Ranking in Process Automation

27th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed File Transfer (MFT) (14th), Workload Automation (14th)

IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Ranking in Process Automation

38th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

5.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (34th)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 1.1%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is 1.1%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Process Automation Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
ActiveBatch by Redwood	1.1%
IBM Cloud Pak for Automation	1.1%
Other	97.8%

Process Automation

Featured Reviews

Abdul_Samad

Application Administrator Lead at Bluestem

Manages thousands of jobs daily and reduces downtime through secondary node support

The current feedback I receive from my end users regarding ActiveBatch by Redwood highlights issues with the tabs or panes during job modification. When the next user monitors it, they need to close the pane or job and reopen it to see the changes reflected. If the end user makes an update, it will not be visible unless they start from the beginning again. Implementing a refresh button would be helpful for real-time updates when the end user needs to see changes immediately. We currently face issues with the web console of ActiveBatch by Redwood. When users operate through an RDP session, every user has their own ActiveBatch by Redwood application. However, on the web console, users encounter daily activity issues where the job instances do not appear or update correctly, and they cannot view the latest logs. This issue is only present on the web console, as the application itself works without any problems. ActiveBatch by Redwood can be improved by adding more features, as we are not currently handling cloud-based applications like S3 buckets and Azure. Connecting to these cloud platforms would be a helpful enhancement.

Read full review

SYEDMUJTABA

Vice President - Digital Automation Services at Techvista Systems

Effectively handles parallel instances effectively

I find it quite straightforward, perhaps around 8.5 out of 10 in terms of ease. When we upgraded from the old version of IBM BPM to the new one within IBM Cloud Pak for Automation, we didn't encounter any major issues. There were some minor ones, but they were easy to overcome.The migration process was part of our deployment strategy. We had a plan to migrate two processes per week from on-premises to the cloud. The migration involved taking the instances and migrating them to the new environment. There is an inbuilt feature in IBM Cloud Pak for Automation that facilitates the migration process, although I personally haven't conducted it myself; it's managed by my team. Overall, the setup process was relatively smooth.

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

"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."

"ActiveBatch helped us automate and schedule routine tasks such as data backups, file transfers, database updates, and report generation, which frees IT staff to focus on other studies."

"As far as centralization goes it's nice because we can see all these processes that are tied to this larger process. The commissions, FTP processing, the reporting, the file moves to the business users — all that is right there. It's very easy to read. It's easy to tie it together, visually, and see where each of these steps fits into the bigger picture."

"The automation feature is a very valuable feature as the associates do not have to worry about performing repetitive tasks (i.e. endpoint security scans on a daily basis) that would take several hours to complete on a daily basis."

"ActiveBatch's Self-Service Portal allows our business units to run and monitor their own workloads. They can simply run and review the logs, but they can't modify them. It increases their productivity because they are able to take care of things on their own. It saves us time from having to rerun the scripts, because the business units can just go ahead and log in and and rerun it themselves."

"One of the valuable features is the ability to trigger workflows, one after another, based on success, without having to worry about overlapping workflows. The ability to integrate our BI, analytics, and our data quality jobs is also valuable"

"From a scheduling point of view, it is pretty good."

"The nice thing about ActiveBatch is once we have created a specific job that can be easily be replicated to another job, then minimal changes will have to be made. This makes things nice. Reduction of coding is substantial in a lot of cases. The replication of one job to another is just doing a few minor tweaks and rolling it into production. This decreases our development costs substantially."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood pros

"What this product allows us to do is to move from on-prem instances where we are running independent instances of FileNet, Datacap, and ODM. It allows us to leverage container-based resiliency and availability modeling so that we have some visibility across the CP4BA ecosystem. We're now migrating all of our data to be in the Cloud Object Storage, and we can now use some of the features of Azure in terms of how we store and retrieve content for our members and our providers."

"I believe two significant features of IBM Cloud Pak for Automation are the focus on SLA management and the capability to handle parallel instances effectively. Parallel instances, for instance, are valuable when dealing with a large number of users, enabling tasks to be performed concurrently for efficient system operation. The SLA aspect is crucial for tracking and ensuring timely completion of tasks. Additionally, the cloud compatibility of IBM BAW allows for seamless migration from on-premises to the cloud. This version also includes a business rule management system for storing and managing business rules effectively."

Cons

"It could be easier to provide dashboards on how many jobs are running at the same time; more monitoring."

"I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized."

"Some improvements can be made to the user interface."

"Between version 10 and version 12 there was a change. In version 10, they had each object in its own folder. But on the back end, they saw it at the root level. So when we moved over to version 12, everything was in the same area mixed together. It was incredibly difficult and we actually had to create our own folders and move those objects—like schedules, jobs, user accounts—and manually put those into folders, whereas the previous version already had it."

"They should offer pricing that is more affordable."

"I have faced struggles to understand, set up the tool, and implement it in my early days as a new user."

"There are very few documents that provide us with detailed information on the troubleshooting of errors that occur during integration with the existing environment."

"We currently face issues with the web console of ActiveBatch by Redwood. When users operate through an RDP session, every user has their own ActiveBatch by Redwood application. However, on the web console, users encounter daily activity issues where the job instances do not appear or update correctly, and they cannot view the latest logs."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood cons

"I believe there is room for improvement in the user interface, particularly in the Process Portal that customers use to view and manage their tasks. The UI of the Process Portal needs enhancement. Additionally, in the next release, I would like to see improved compatibility with Angular, allowing for direct integration with front-end systems. It would be beneficial to have built-in GUI features based on Angular within the system, rather than developing separate applications externally. This, in turn, would provide a more seamless and enhanced front-end experience."

"One of the challenges we're having is finding vendors who have experience in developing on the cloud. We can find developers on the old platform, but it is leading-edge technology. So, we are having some challenges, and IBM is assisting us to find vendor partners. To be able to leverage all the capabilities of the new platform, we have to upgrade our existing ecosystem of FileNet applications. Upgrading to the new platform while trying to modernize is always challenging because it is like you have a moving target."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."

"Currently, we are paying approximately $7,000 yearly, which includes support."

"Its cost is almost the same or comparable to what we pay with FileNet, but I'm not sure what we pay a year. A good part of CP4BA is the CPU-based licensing model. When we're dealing with 50,000 dentists, for example, if we were to use Salesforce, we would be hit with the licensing of 50,000 dentists, whereas when we build out in CP4BA, it is just based on our CPU usage, not on individual licenses."

"IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is relatively expensive, especially considering it is designed for long-living processes, not for normal automation needs. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the pricing at around 9. There are no additional costs beyond the standard licensing fees, but IBM has multiple pricing models that make it expensive in its own way. Different plans are available, but overall, the experience suggests it is a costly solution."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Insurance Company

Performing Arts

Manufacturing Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	47

No data available

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ActiveBatch by Redwood has been great; we recently renewed our license, and it was a smooth process without any issues.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

I believe ActiveBatch by Redwood could be improved because the UI could be modernized.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for ActiveBatch Workload Automation?

My main use case for ActiveBatch by Redwood is file processing. I use ActiveBatch by Redwood for file processing for debit card transactions.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Control-M vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 16% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 11% of the time

Stonebranch vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 9% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 8% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 7% of the time

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Competitors

IBM BPM vs IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Compared 22% of the time

Appian vs IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Compared 17% of the time

Nintex Process Platform vs IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Compared 17% of the time

Pega Platform vs IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Compared 16% of the time

Camunda vs IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Compared 13% of the time

More IBM Cloud Pak for Automation Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood

February 2026

Download ActiveBatch by Redwood product report

Buyer's Guide

Process Automation

January 2026

Download IBM Cloud Pak for Automation product report

Also Known As

ActiveBatch

No data available

Overview

ActiveBatch by Redwood enhances efficiency with features like job scheduling, integration, and real-time monitoring. It supports diverse platforms, automates tasks, and offers a single-pane view with robust security.

ActiveBatch streamlines automation by offering drag-and-drop functionality, pre-built job steps, and native integrations. Its customizable workflows and alert system aid in managing complex workloads like data processing and server monitoring across hybrid environments. While it effectively reduces manual errors and enhances productivity, areas like navigation and support for cloud platforms need enhancement. New users may face challenges due to its complexity and steep learning curve, and further improvements in reporting, mobile access, and training could provide additional support to users.

What important features does ActiveBatch offer?

Comprehensive Job Scheduling: Manages and automates complex workloads efficiently.
Integration Capabilities: Seamlessly connects with different platforms and applications.
Real-time Monitoring: Offers a single-pane view for quick issue identification.
Customizable Workflows: Tailors processes to specific organizational tasks.
Robust Alert System: Ensures timely notifications for critical events.
Data Protection: Incorporates strong security measures for secure operations.

What benefits should be considered when evaluating ActiveBatch?

Enhanced Efficiency: Automates repetitive tasks, reducing manual intervention.
Improved Productivity: Streamlines processes across hybrid environments.
Error Reduction: Decreases likelihood of manual errors.
Platform Support: Provides integration with diverse systems.

In finance, ActiveBatch is implemented for orchestrating batch processes and data management. The healthcare industry utilizes it for automating patient data updates and server monitoring, while the retail sector benefits from file transfers and inventory management automation.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

IBM Cloud Pak for Automation offers design, build, run, and automation services to rapidly scale your programs and fully execute and operationalize an automation strategy.

IBM

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

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

February 2026

Free Report: ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,757 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation report.

See our list of best Process Automation vendors.

We monitor all Process Automation 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.