ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Temporal comparison

ActiveBatch by Redwood and Temporal Technologies are both solutions in the Process Automation category. ActiveBatch by Redwood is ranked #34, while Temporal Technologies is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.6. ActiveBatch by Redwood holds a 0.8% mindshare in PA, compared to Temporal Technologies’s 7.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of ActiveBatch by Redwood users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 94% of Temporal Technologies users who would recommend it.

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Read 35 ActiveBatch by Redwood reviews

1,943 Views
486 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Temporal

Read 18 Temporal reviews

2,278 Views
2,278 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

ActiveBatch by Redwood

Temporal

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

ActiveBatch by Redwood and Temporal compete in the field of automation and workflow orchestration. ActiveBatch has the upper hand in versatility and integration capabilities, making it a comprehensive solution for various IT processes.

Features: ActiveBatch offers robust features like monitoring job status, customizable scripting for task automation, and seamless integration with different systems. It effectively manages large volumes and enables automation of file transfers and database queries. Temporal focuses on developers with its workflow orchestration prowess, handling complex workflows and distributed transactions. It provides reliability and integrates well with existing tech stacks, making it ideal for microservice environments.

Room for Improvement: ActiveBatch can be complex for new users, requiring improved documentation and enhanced UI. It also needs better support for cloud integrations. Temporal's challenges lie in its complex terminology and limited documentation, alongside the absence of built-in data storage and unrefined visualization tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both ActiveBatch and Temporal offer flexible deployment options, including on-premises and cloud solutions. ActiveBatch users report mixed experiences with customer service, noting inconsistent support personnel knowledge. Temporal is praised for its fast and effective support, though it relies on additional deployments like AWS, which makes it more developer-friendly.

Pricing and ROI: ActiveBatch typically involves licensing costs with additional fees for specific integrations but is seen as offering good value for its comprehensive features and the operational efficiencies it brings. Temporal, being open-source, offers cost-effectiveness without licensing fees, although infrastructure costs can be significant. It provides flexibility and reliability, with potential indirect costs for custom workflow implementation related to infrastructure and maintenance.

To learn more, read our detailed ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Temporal Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Temporal

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 869,566 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

34th

Average Rating

9.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Managed File Transfer (MFT) (18th), Workload Automation (19th)

Temporal

Ranking in Process Automation

3rd

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of ActiveBatch by Redwood is 0.8%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Temporal is 7.6%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Process Automation Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Temporal	7.6%
ActiveBatch by Redwood	0.8%
Other	91.6%

Process Automation

Featured Reviews

Shubham Bharti

Senior Analyst at Capgemini

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.

Read full review

AbhishekDash

Senior Software Engineer at A.P. Moller - Maersk

Orchestrates infrastructure tasks like deployment, deletion, and management

Temporal focus on developers rather than business users. In contrast to older workflow orchestration engines like Camunda, which are more business-oriented and strongly emphasize UI and workflow authoring, Temporal is geared toward developers. It provides extensive capabilities for building complex workflows. A standout feature of Temporal is its handling of long-running workflows, a significant advantage over many other solutions. Temporal excels in managing distributed transactions and application state durability, especially in microservice environments where transactions might fail due to network issues. Temporal simplifies these challenges by managing retries, fail-safes, and circuit breakers. As a result, developers don't need to implement these features manually; Temporal handles them implicitly, though it also allows for tuning based on specific needs.

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

"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."

"There are hundreds of pre-built steps."

"The REST API adapters and native integrations for integrating and orchestrating the software stack are very flexible."

"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."

"The Jobs Library has been a tremendous asset. For the most, that's what we use. There are some outliers, but we pretty much integrate those Jobs Library steps throughout the process, whether it's REST calls, FTP processes, or file copies and moves... That has helped us to build end-to-end workflows."

"For developers, it is easy to orchestrate the workflows and the integration has been very easy."

"The user interface is really incredible."

"The product offers a centralized platform for managing activities across many environments, applications, etc."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood pros

"Temporal allows retryability for different workflows whenever they fail. It helps ensure idempotence and that things get done."

"What I like best about the tool is that it's easy to install, especially since it uses JavaScript. It's also easy to set up with Docker, and the documentation is easy to understand."

"The initial setup is easy."

"The most valuable thing about Temporal is that we can create multiple and child workflows. We can segregate work as we want, which is good for work organization. It's also easy to maintain. We're trying to generate and fill PDF forms with custom data, including digital signatures. We call AWS and do all activities through Temporal, like calling and saving data in buckets. We do this because we have a lot of load, with multiple users requesting data. We have two types of users: admin and customer. The admin creates forms, and employees or customers fill them out. When admin gets a form, it's stored in Temporal."

"The most valuable feature is its ability to manage and automate workflows without manual intervention efficiently."

"What I like best about Temporal is its durable execution, which means you don't need to write many boilerplate code for critical pieces, especially for retries. It also has great observability and a nice dashboard to see issues without digging into logs. The interface for viewing activities is excellent, with good tracing that shows how long activities took and what ran, making it almost perfect for debugging."

"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to fix things quickly."

"The tool is easy for a beginner to learn. The documentation covers activities, workflows, workers, servers, and more. While more examples could be beneficial, the existing resources are good enough to help you get started. There are also YouTube videos available that can provide additional context. The Slack community for Temporal is very active and helpful, similar to Stack Overflow, where you can find answers to a wide range of questions from basic to advanced levels. If you have a unique question, the community is responsive and provides knowledgeable support."

More Temporal pros

Cons

"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 user interface can be improved so that it is more appealing and accessible to new users."

"Any product is going to have some room for improvement, no matter what. I see the company has already ventured into AWS and they're constantly trying to improve the managed file transfer which they have recently improvised. I think they bought a software called JSCAPE and they're trying to improve it, which is good. I am not sure if JSCAPE would be part of the base product but currently, you have to buy a separate license for it, which doesn't make sense. If it was Microsoft, ServiceNow, or integrating with other software vendors, I would understand but JSCAPE is now in-house and I'm not sure if they can justify having a separate license for JSCAPE. I would probably expect them to be packaging JSCAPE into the base product. They did switch over from a perpetual license model to a subscription model, which hurt the company a little bit. Nobody is offering the perpetual model anymore. As long as the transition is fair for both the companies, I think it should be fine and not burn us out."

"ActiveBatch UI could use a little more help, and video tutorials would be greatly appreciated for user guides."

"We have faced a couple of issues where we were supposed to log a defect with ActiveBatch. That said, the Active batch Vendor Support is very responsive and reliable."

"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."

"The interface is not that user-friendly and is a little tough to navigate."

"A nice thing to have would be the ability to comfortably pass variables from one job to another. That was one of the things that I found difficult."

More ActiveBatch by Redwood cons

"I don't like the limitations on data flow, particularly the difficulty of passing large amounts of data between different activities."

"Configuring workflows can be improved —the solution could offer more options, but it's not a must-have."

"Temporal lacks many resources, like YouTube videos, which users can use to learn or refer to if they get stuck with the solution."

"One area for the product improvement is the learning curve."

"Temporal doesn't have built-in data storage to store the state of the ongoing execution."

"Temporal's debugging is a bit complex."

"While the tool can be a bit daunting initially, especially if you're not used to async programming models, it's generally a pleasure. There's always room for improvement, though. I've noticed some limitations with the .NET SDK regarding dynamic workflows, but this might have been improved in recent versions. Overall, I think Temporal could be more open about implementing features in a more—.NET-friendly way, especially in how you add workers and clients."

"Retro compatibility needs improvement. Sometimes, when we make new changes to a workflow, it fails if it is not configured properly due to compatibility issues."

More Temporal cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It allows for lower operational overhead."

"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."

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

"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."

"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 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 savings weren't as big as we initially expected, but they were pretty great from a developer's perspective."

"It is worth the price."

"Temporal is open-source and free to use, which is great. We didn't have to pay for any premium features."

"Temporal is a free, open-source tool."

"The tool is open source under the MIT license, so there are no hidden fees. You can freely use everything on their GitHub and Docker images."

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

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Retailer

Financial Services Firm

28%

Computer Software Company

15%

Retailer

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	46

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	6

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Temporal?

In terms of pricing, Camunda is indeed costlier than Temporal. The cloud deployment costs differ, and while Camunda 7 can be cheaper due to its integrated setup, comparing latest versions between T...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Temporal?

The only area for improvement in Temporal is the UI. I know it is a non-UI first product, but comparing Camunda versus Temporal UI, there is a difference. Moreover, n8n, being a no-code platform, i...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Temporal?

The main purposes for using Temporal are automation flows, especially financial automations and supply chain automations. Our company name is SR, we are a digital-first CPG brand making company, ma...

See all answers

Comparisons

Control-M vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 16% of the time

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 13% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 9% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 8% of the time

Stonebranch vs ActiveBatch by Redwood

Compared 8% of the time

More ActiveBatch by Redwood Competitors

Camunda vs Temporal

Compared 42% of the time

Flowable vs Temporal

Compared 15% of the time

Orkes vs Temporal

Compared 15% of the time

Pega Platform vs Temporal

Compared 5% of the time

Rundeck vs Temporal

Compared 5% of the time

More Temporal Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

ActiveBatch by Redwood

October 2025

Download ActiveBatch by Redwood product report

Buyer's Guide

Temporal

September 2025

Download Temporal 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

Temporal automates and manages workflows efficiently, offering resilience in distributed systems with features like retry and fault tolerance. Its capabilities in handling complex workflows and integrating with programming languages make it a valuable tool for managing diverse business logic.

Temporal excels in workflow orchestration, automating tasks across multiple platforms, and ensuring durability in asynchronous operations. It supports long-running workflows and simplifies handling distributed transactions, reducing boilerplate code. Temporal is noted for its durable execution and built-in retry policies, enhancing resilience. Despite its complexity and steep learning curve, it is valued for its integration with popular programming languages and relatively easy setup process, though it requires improvements in user-friendly features, documentation, community support, and security.

What are Temporal's key features?

Automation and Efficient Management: Automatically handles workflows without manual intervention.
Resilience and Fault Tolerance: Features built-in retry policies for increased reliability.
Integration: Supports various programming languages, easing development.
Distributed Transactions: Simplifies complex transaction handling with reduced boilerplate code.
Durable Execution: Ensures long-running workflows are reliably managed.

What benefits or ROI should users evaluate?

Scalability and Reliability: Enhances IT environments through robust workflow management.
Ease of Integration: Supports seamless multi-platform automation.
Improved Operational Efficiency: Reduces need for extensive coding, streamlining processes.
Durability and Fault Tolerance: Provides reliable asynchronous operations.

Temporal is implemented in sectors requiring robust workflow orchestration, such as managing data pipelines, API integration, and scheduling tasks. Organizations in a Kubernetes environment leverage it for its scalability and infrastructure management capabilities, securing integrations and enhancing reliability across IT operations.

Temporal Technologies

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. Temporal

September 2025

Free Report: ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Temporal

Find out what your peers are saying about ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Temporal and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Temporal 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.