ActiveBatch by Redwood vs IBM Cloud Pak for Automation comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
ActiveBatch by Redwood Logo
995 views|318 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
IBM Logo
359 views|220 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between ActiveBatch by Redwood and IBM Cloud Pak for Automation based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation Report (Updated: March 2024).
769,630 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"We are able to integrate it into multiple third-party tools like email, backup, tracking systems, SharePoint, Slack alerts, etc.""There are hundreds of pre-built steps.""For developers, it is easy to orchestrate the workflows and the integration has been very easy.""ActiveBatch provides summary reports and logs for further analysis and improvements in monitoring servers, which is very handy.""One of the most valuable features is the job templates. If we need to create an FTP job, we just drag over the FTP template and fill out the requirements using the variables that ActiveBatch uses. And that makes it reusable. We can create a job once but use it for many different clients.""ActiveBatch can automate predictable, repeatable processes very well. There is no real trick to what ActiveBatch does. ActiveBatch does exactly what you would expect a scheduling piece of software to do. It does it in a timely manner and does it with very little outside interference and fanfare. It runs when it is supposed to, and I don't have to jump through a bunch of hoops to double check it.""What ActiveBatch allows you to do is develop a more efficient process. It gave me visibility into all my jobs so I could choose which jobs to run in parallel. This is much easier than when I have to try to do it through cron for Windows XP, where you really can't do things in parallel and know what is going on.""Approximately ~20 hours of manual effort have been reduced to ~5 hours with the help of ActiveBatch."

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."

More IBM Cloud Pak for Automation Pros →

Cons
"As more organizations are moving towards a cloud-based infrastructure, ActiveBatch could incorporate more capabilities that support popular cloud platforms, such as AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud.""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.""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.""The monitoring dashboard could have been more user-friendly so that in the monitoring dashboard itself we can see the total number of jobs created in the system and how many were currently active/scheduled/chained.""There is this back and forth, where ActiveBatch says, "Your Oracle people should be dealing with this," and Oracle people say, "No, we don't know anything about ActiveBatch." Then, it all falls back on me as to what happens. Nobody is taking responsibility. This is the biggest failing for ActiveBatch.""ActiveBatch UI could use a little more help, and video tutorials would be greatly appreciated for user guides.""It could be easier to provide dashboards on how many jobs are running at the same time; more monitoring.""Some of the advanced features in the user interface are a bit confusing even after referring to the documents."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Cons →

"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.""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."

More IBM Cloud Pak for Automation Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The price was fairly in line with other automation tools. I don't think it's exorbitantly expensive, relatively speaking."
  • "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."
  • "It allows for lower operational overhead."
  • "Currently, we are paying approximately $7,000 yearly, which includes support."
  • "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 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."
  • "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."
  • "If you compare ActiveBatch licensing to Control-M, you're looking at $50,000 as opposed to millions."
  • More ActiveBatch by Redwood Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "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."
  • More IBM Cloud Pak for Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
    769,630 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer: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 of… more »
    Top Answer: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 referring… more »
    Top Answer: 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… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Top Answer: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… more »
    Ranking
    6th
    out of 66 in Process Automation
    Views
    995
    Comparisons
    318
    Reviews
    23
    Average Words per Review
    658
    Rating
    9.3
    20th
    out of 66 in Process Automation
    Views
    359
    Comparisons
    220
    Reviews
    2
    Average Words per Review
    1,104
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    ActiveBatch
    Learn More
    Overview

    Orchestrate your entire tech stack with ActiveBatch Workload Automation and Enterprise Job Scheduling. Build and centralize end-to-end workflows under a single pane of glass. Seamlessly manage systems, applications, and services across your organization. Eliminate manual workflows with ActiveBatch so you can focus on higher value activities that drive your company forward.

    Limitless Endpoints: Use native integrations and our low-code REST API adapter to connect to any server, any application, any service.

    Proactive Support Model: 24/7- US-based support and predictive diagnostics.

    Low Code Drag-and-Drop GUI: Easily build reliable, customizable, end-to-end processes.

    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.

    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
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Insurance Company21%
    Computer Software Company21%
    Venture Capital & Private Equity Firm8%
    Financial Services Firm8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm24%
    Computer Software Company11%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Insurance Company8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm38%
    Government11%
    Manufacturing Company8%
    Computer Software Company8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise20%
    Large Enterprise67%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business18%
    Midsize Enterprise17%
    Large Enterprise65%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business17%
    Midsize Enterprise10%
    Large Enterprise73%
    Buyer's Guide
    ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation
    March 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Cloud Pak for Automation and other solutions. Updated: March 2024.
    769,630 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked 6th in Process Automation with 35 reviews while IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is ranked 20th in Process Automation with 2 reviews. ActiveBatch by Redwood is rated 9.2, while IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ActiveBatch by Redwood writes "Flexible, easy to use, and offers good automation". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Cloud Pak for Automation writes "Allows us to leverage container-based resiliency and availability modeling, but we're having challenges in finding vendors who have experience in developing on the cloud". ActiveBatch by Redwood is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Tidal by Redwood, Redwood RunMyJobs and VisualCron, whereas IBM Cloud Pak for Automation is most compared with IBM BPM. 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.