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

Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow vs AutoSys Workload Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Amazon Managed Workflows fo...
Ranking in Workload Automation
20th
Average Rating
6.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
AutoSys Workload Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
82
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow is 1.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of AutoSys Workload Automation is 10.5%, down from 17.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2499300 - PeerSpot reviewer
Manages multiple version changes during development, but the user interface needs improvement
The deployment process could have been more straightforward. It involved enabling the service and choosing between small, medium, or large configurations, followed by reading the documentation to determine the best fit for our use case. However, the documentation provided is good. The installation of the service itself takes only a few minutes.
Antony Askew - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time
The visibility and control features are somewhat limited. This is a recognized weakness, but thee vendor is currently revamping the user interface to address it. While the current UI is a bit outdated, it's undergoing improvement. AutoSys Workload Automation has some areas for improvement, particularly in housekeeping and product maintenance. These tasks are currently quite manual and labor-intensive for our team. Additionally, the reporting and forecasting functionalities could be more robust. One area for improvement with AutoSys Workload Automation is that it comprises several distinct tools configured to work together. This necessitates familiarity with multiple tools for effective solution management. Consequently, it can sometimes lack a sense of cohesiveness as a unified solution.

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 product's main strengths is that it is well-suited for a DevOps pattern, allowing us to automate our CI/CD pipeline."
"To me, what's most valuable in AutoSys Workload Automation is its robustness and quickness. The tool can trigger jobs within a few milliseconds, and it can handle large volumes of jobs."
"Integration with multiple services and applications across the enterprise."
"The most valuable feature of AutoSys Workload Automation is batch processing."
"We use CA Workload Automation AE r11.3.6 to automate enterprise-wide scheduling and file transfers using an FTP plugin."
"The features that I have found most valuable with AutoSys are that it is scalable, easy to use, fast, and always available. That's very important because if it's not steady then it's a real problem. So, at this point, we are satisfied with it."
"Automic Automation Engine provides us the ability to map logic using a scripting language."
"It has helped to simplify cross-dependency between MVS and Open systems jobs."
"​It scales very well. We can add jobs and remove jobs. We do not have problems maintaining the product across multiple environments and multiple servers.​"
 

Cons

"The documentation provided is good."
"Needs better documentation with fully explained examples for some of the job types."
"The WCC could be improved."
"We are trying to see if we can use this from a cloud perspective with AWS, Azure, and other clouds, but it seems that there is no cloud integration in this product. We would like to see cloud integration. We are very pleased with this solution, but we are moving our application to the cloud, and we found out that it doesn't support any cloud features. So, we are trying to find a replacement."
"The reporting system, currently, could be better."
"​A better graphical user interface, because we have a lot of people using the client utility, and we want to get them away from that.​"
"​The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement."
"The GUI/Workstation is weak and needs to be improved. CA is working on this right now."
"​CA installation processes are never anything but complex.​"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is not an inexpensive solution but it is less expensive than other options."
"There is an annual license to use AutoSys Workload Automation."
"I don't have information on the exact licensing cost of AutoSys Workload Automation because that's managed by the tools and financing teams. For agents, it's close to $4,00, but for the server setup, it's usually a one-time license initially, and it's AMC which is paid every year and comes close to $8,000 to $10,000."
"It is overpriced."
"We paid to use the solution monthly."
"Validate how many agents you need beforehand."
"CA pricing has been a problem, and not looked upon favorably here at all."
"People need to pay attention to how they use their ESP agents on the distributed platform. That's where some of the cost comes in, based on how many you need or how many you use."
"I certainly think the pricing is worth the value."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Transportation Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
46%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
6%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow?
I rate the product pricing a five. It is not an inexpensive solution but it is less expensive than other options like Control M.
What needs improvement with Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow?
We encounter challenges transitioning from a graphical user interface like Control M to a code-based approach. It does not have a user interface for building or configuring schedules, which makes i...
What advice do you have for others considering Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow?
One of the product's main strengths is that it is well-suited for a DevOps pattern, allowing us to automate our CI/CD pipeline. The scheduling as code feature works efficiently to promote changes t...
How does Control-M compare with AutoSys Workload Automation?
Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and th...
What do you like most about AutoSys Workload Automation?
The most valuable aspects of AutoSys Workload Automation are its performance, scalability, and ease of getting started for new users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AutoSys Workload Automation?
The solution is costly. The pricing is based on the number of users, which for me, translates to approximately $120,000 to $130,000 for a license period of two to three years.
 

Also Known As

No data available
CA Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation AE
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Gaumont, Mercantil do Brasil, CCEE, Hanwha Life
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: August 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.