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

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs IBM Workload Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
8.2
ActiveBatch by Redwood enhances productivity and reduces costs by automating processes, improving efficiency, and streamlining operations for growth.
Sentiment score
5.2
IBM Workload Automation is valuable for complex setups with trained teams, despite maintenance costs and slower performance on simpler networks.
I have seen a return on investment with ActiveBatch by Redwood, as it is cost-efficient and has improved time management.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
ActiveBatch by Redwood's support is praised for quick responses, helpful assistance, and adaptability, despite occasional variation in quality.
Sentiment score
8.3
Opinions on IBM Workload Automation's support vary; some praise it, while others face delays and inconsistent service.
We often need to escalate issues to level two or three for solutions related to long-standing problems.
I would rate their support between eight and nine out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
ActiveBatch by Redwood efficiently manages scalability, supporting thousands of jobs daily with minimal issues across various domains and time zones.
Sentiment score
7.0
IBM Workload Automation is preferred for scalability in complex scheduling, with minor challenges at higher scales, especially in time zones.
ActiveBatch by Redwood's scalability is excellent; it experiences minimal failures and outages.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
ActiveBatch by Redwood is reliable and efficient, with minimal downtime and maintenance, enhancing operational efficiency for organizations.
Sentiment score
8.8
IBM Workload Automation is viewed as reliable and stable, with minor issues resolved swiftly, boosting user confidence.
 

Room For Improvement

ActiveBatch requires enhanced usability, documentation, mobile alerts, and cloud integration to improve user experience and appeal.
IBM Workload Automation requires interface improvements, enhanced automation, better support, and lower maintenance costs to improve user experience.
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.
The maintenance charges have increased significantly, and a lower cost would be beneficial.
 

Setup Cost

ActiveBatch offers good value with flexible licensing, comprehensive features, and is cost-effective compared to other automation tools.
IBM Workload Automation is costly but offers flexible pricing models with cloud advantages and justifies expense with reliability and features.
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for ActiveBatch by Redwood has been great
 

Valuable Features

ActiveBatch by Redwood enhances efficiency and workflow with automation, integration, and user-friendly features for seamless operations.
IBM Workload Automation excels with dynamic scheduling, multiplatform integration, user-friendly GUI, real-time updates, and effective monitoring.
ActiveBatch by Redwood has positively impacted my organization by efficiently managing a significant volume of data and workflow between our database and applications on the web browser.
One valuable feature of IBM Workload Automation is the ability to combine different applications and platforms to organize jobs together, creating dependencies.
 

Categories and Ranking

ActiveBatch by Redwood
Ranking in Workload Automation
19th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
36
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (34th), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (18th)
IBM Workload Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 2.8%, up from 2.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Workload Automation is 6.0%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM Workload Automation6.0%
ActiveBatch by Redwood2.8%
Other91.2%
Workload 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.
Ilhami Arikan - PeerSpot reviewer
With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes
Sometimes we have issues with the solution's stability. So, stability can be improved. Reporting and visibility of the solution need improvement. These days, we need more visibility. We need to access the logs and databases easily. You need to keep track of the running number of logs, like which ones are executed, completed, etc. So if there would be a good reporting dashboard, then it would be good. There's room for improvement in the solution since it is a challenging thing when we want to use the solution's technology with our new technologies. For example, if we need to use TWS on our OpenShift platform, the solution's API is not capable enough. So the product itself needs to be aligned with new technologies.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
872,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Insurance Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
7%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
Retailer
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise47
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise29
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with IBM Workload Automation?
IBM Workload Automation could be improved by reducing its cost. The maintenance charges have increased significantly, and a lower cost would be beneficial.
What is your primary use case for IBM Workload Automation?
We use IBM Workload Automation ( /products/ibm-workload-automation-reviews ) as a scheduler. We install agents on the application servers and use scheduling to trigger jobs on other servers. Our us...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Workload Automation?
I recommend IBM Workload Automation as it's a well-established and stable product. However, the cost is a concern. The product features a master-slave setup that ensures continuity during failures....
 

Also Known As

ActiveBatch
IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler, IBM TWS
 

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
Standard Life Group, Banca Popolare di Milano, A*STAR, ArcelorMittal Gent
Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. IBM Workload Automation and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
872,706 professionals have used our research since 2012.