Control-M vs Rocket Zena comparison

BMC and Rocket Software are both solutions in the Workload Automation category. BMC is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.6, while Rocket Software is ranked #22. BMC holds a 14.4% mindshare in WA, compared to Rocket Software’s 2.5% mindshare. Additionally, 98% of BMC users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Rocket Software users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 13, 2026

Control-M and Rocket Zena are competing in the workflow automation category. Data comparisons suggest Rocket Zena has an advantage due to its feature set, although Control-M offers better pricing and support.

Features: Control-M provides robust workload automation, job scheduling, and complex monitoring. It features cross-platform support, an intuitive GUI, and seamless integrations with SAP and Informatica. Rocket Zena stands out with flexible integration, a user-friendly web client, and the ability to automate complex workflows across multiple technology stacks.

Room for Improvement: Control-M can improve by enhancing its API integration and reducing complexity for new users. It would benefit from more visual monitoring tools and resolving GUI inconsistencies. Rocket Zena requires improvements in its customer support service and could enhance documentation for better ease of use. Refining deployment models and introducing a stronger community support framework could be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Control-M is recognized for its simple deployment and superior customer service, allowing smooth integration into IT environments. Rocket Zena offers a versatile deployment approach but encounters efficiency challenges in customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M provides a cost-effective, accessible setup with a strong ROI driven by effective performance management and support services. Rocket Zena, despite higher initial costs, promises long-term ROI through workflow optimization and feature value, making it a worthy investment for the future.

To learn more, read our detailed Control-M vs. Rocket Zena Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,594 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

JAMS

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of JAMS is 2.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 14.4%, down from 25.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zena is 2.5%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Workload Automation Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Control-M	14.4%
JAMS	2.8%
Rocket Zena	2.5%
Other	80.3%

Workload Automation

Featured Reviews

reviewer2770605

Cloud Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

Has streamlined complex job scheduling across scripting languages while reducing manual effort

JAMS could be improved with a web client that is accessible and as fast as a normal website, eliminating the need to RDP to the servers to access the JAMS client. A functionality running on the JAMS server to continuously check the JAMS agents would ensure they are working properly. If an agent is not responding, a feature to restart the service from the job server machine would be beneficial. The upgrade process, particularly when switching from V6 to V7, could be clearer in terms of documentation, ideally with screenshots showing exactly what needs to be done on each screen.

Read full review

Raj Pattni

Batch Admin at NBC Universal

Brings data together from multiple platforms and optimizes cross-environment orchestration

The features of Control-M that I like the most include the ability to easily integrate or bring in different platforms into Control-M. For instance, AWS, mainframe, TWS, and something that's running on Autosys can all be brought into Control-M, converted to how Control-M runs it, and then the batch can be executed. This centralizes various applications in Control-M, which doesn't just have to handle batch processes, but also other tasks like reporting on required data. I find this functionality very useful and the setup is impressive, with more advancements yet to come. With Control-M, my company has achieved several measurable improvements since I started. The metrics indicate that the number of failures has dropped, and we have addressed the issue of excessive false alerts that I encountered when I joined. Previously, we received an overwhelming number of alerts daily, but now we manage to maintain that at a normalized level, perhaps around five to fifteen alerts, depending on running core batches and their setup.

Read full review

JuanGonzalez6

IT Solutions Manager at a government with 5,001-10,000 employees

A continuously evolving, stable solution, with responsive support

The visual whiteboard for design and execution included with the solution is very crucial to those who are new to Rocket Zena, especially so that the learning curve is minimized and they can focus on accomplishing the task. We process our system's payroll through Rocket Zena. The fact that it's a multi-process, multi-layered application, means that we can rely on the solution for kicking off processes, notifying user vendors of the steps, completions, error logging, and historic events from the previous run times. Rocket Zena's ability to automate jobs on the mainframe as a distribution workload automation solution is good. The solution continuously improves over time. We're eager to start the latest upgrade this coming year that'll put us on the cloud. Hopefully, this will improve the product even more. We can run things natively without the scheduler if needed. The solution working properly and up to date without the need for a mainframe scheduler is crucial. We use the solution to manage a few complex operational workflows end-to-end across multiple technology stacks. Rocket Zena does a great job of simplifying our cross-platform processes through automation. The solution helps speed operations up and keeps them automated allowing us to focus on other priorities. The solution helps increase our completion rates by working overnight to meet our SLAs. Rocket Zena completes 30 percent of our workload outside of our standard work hours. Rocket Zena's cross-platform job scheduling helped us save around 40 percent of programming time by automating repetitive tasks. We use the solution to transfer our current files and keep up with our infrastructure on a few automated jobs, such as refreshing our database which happens overnight. The solution helped free up around 15 percent of our engineer's time to focus on more value-added work.

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 appreciate JAMS for its readily available templates that allow me to create and deliver stand-up presentations within minutes quickly."

"Fortra's JAMS helped us centralize job management across our platforms and applications. This is critical because we schedule tasks across multiple applications and operating systems, using triggers and start dates to coordinate their execution."

"It makes everything that we want to do so much easier. We have had a number of instances in the past where we have had developers who have been working on a project, and even though we have had JAMS for all these years, they will create some SQL Server Agent job, or something like that, to run a task. When it is in code review and development is complete, the question always comes around, "Can JAMS do this?" The answer has always been, "Yes." Pretty much anything we have ever developed could be run by JAMS."

"It's a full-featured job scheduling tool. The part that I liked the best was the support team. This tool was new, and we were all learning it and setting up the different jobs that were complex in nature. Their support team was very responsive in helping us out through the setup and resolving the issues. They have been incredibly awesome."

"We can see all the batch execution status within the tool itself, which saves money, time, and cost, allowing us to handle everything in one single tool."

"The code-driven automation for more complex scheduling requirements frees up time because it's really easy to use... It's almost like a stand-alone software that we can't live without."

"We looked at other companies, like VisualCron, that were cheaper, but one of the main sticking points was the fact that they wouldn't have provided a central location for us to monitor across all servers. That was one of the biggest selling points of JAMS."

"Being able to create a series of chained jobs, which are basically linked jobs is valuable."

More JAMS pros

"Control-M has helped to improve our data transfers because it allows us to monitor the execution of the process. With other technologies, we cannot do that."

"The unified view where you can define, orchestrate, and monitor applications, workflows, and data pipelines is important because we have more than one team working on Control-M. We have a support team, a job-creation team, and a SAP team. We can all work together on it. It avoids anyone from working on his part and not using the latest modifications."

"If a job fails, that development team is notified right away, which improves reliability. Previously, it was on the operators to notify the developers that their job failed, erred, or aborted. Now, it's all automated."

"It is a highly scalable solution...I rate the product's initial setup a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is easy."

"BIM is a good tool to monitor SLAs, and being a financial organization, this is a very good feature for us."

"Ability to handle files remotely through the advanced file transfer feature."

"If they have ad hoc requirements, then they can theoretically schedule their own file transfers with the Self Service. We are trying to push as much work back to the customers or developers that have that requirement, because they prefer to help themselves, if possible. We try empowering them and enabling them through Control-M, especially for file transfers, because it is a much broader base of the business then just with batch scheduling. Typically, with SAP batch scheduling, it would work with dedicated teams. With file transfers, the entire business is involved. There are business users, end users, etc. It definitely needs to be as simple as possible and as managed as well as possible. They need to manage it themselves, if possible, because our team is not growing but the number of customers, applications, and jobs are growing. We need to hand back some of the responsibility to the customer for them to resolve and action it."

"Control-M is very easy to use; there shouldn't be any technical knowledge required for using Control-M, making it more user-friendly compared to other tools in the market."

More Control-M pros

"The most valuable feature is the FTP file transfer."

"From a Linux configuration point of view, Rocket Zena is straightforward. It's fairly easy to set up the server and agents once you know how to do it."

"In the latest upgrade, Zena added a web-based client. The more I use it, the more I like it. It's an excellent interface. They do a good job of steadily improving the solution to make it more useful."

"Its FTP feature is very good, as is scheduling any process or task with the Zena client. I have found it to be very helpful. If a task fails, it gives you a prompt."

"I like the whole product, but specifically, I like the license part. It's very easy to acquire a license for this product."

"We haven't had any problems since we installed it. It runs as expected, we haven't had any critical problems. It helps keeps the business running 24/7."

"I have found the scheduling feature the most valuable. I can map dependencies by using ASG-Zena. It gives a nice, quick visualization as to where things are."

"You can click Ctrl-G and bring a diagram view. You're able to view in a diagram format. The view that it provides is easy, and you can move to the left, up, or down. You can double-click on a certain process. It'll drill into that process and all of its underlying components. You can double-click on an arrow or a component, and it'll bring up a screen that'll have all the variables that are assigned to that particular piece, as well as the values at run time. So, the diagram feature of it, at least for me, is pretty valuable."

Cons

"I would like to see the ability to interface with Microsoft group-managed service accounts, but they're still in the research phase. They need to ensure everything's legit and safe. The report designer and dashboards could also be improved. We're running 7.3, so I don't know if they have updated the reporting in 7.5, but I think the reports and dashboards could be better."

"The documentation is not super... It's not as quick and slick as I'd like it to be."

"The monitoring of the JAMS product and its performance is an area of concern for me."

"JAMS notifications for hung jobs could be improved."

"We have had a lot of people working from home who can't always connect to the JAMS server. We use VPN, as most companies do, and we have it set up so that everybody can access the JAMS server. But many times, our people cannot access it... JAMS could do a better job of telling you what the problem is when you try to log in to the server."

"The JAMS automation code isn't so clean."

"JAMS lacks source control features. Our previous solution had job control language, but JAMS doesn't. When migrating between versions, JAMS doesn't migrate all the data, like job change history, etc. Also, the scheduler doesn't have a way to make jobs invisible, so you can temporarily turn a job off if you decide not to run it today."

"With no programming experience, I find JAMS code-driven automation challenging due to the required PowerShell scripting."

More JAMS cons

"I would like to see more audit report templates added, and perhaps more customizability in terms of reporting."

"The stability of Control-M has Not been great. A big thing we've been trying to work on with BMC is observability. Modern applications should be observable and resilient, but we're finding that sometimes Control-M is not very resilient and many times Control-M is not very observable."

"When it comes to supporting cloud services, Control-M is a bit slow. We are not advancing with the technology because we don't have the modules that can interact or use the new application services provided by the cloud technologies."

"You need to pay for extra features if you need them."

"Pricing and licensing for Control-M are challenging aspects."

"Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features."

"We have some issues on the SAP side of BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer...So, there are some stability issues when it comes to SAP side."

"Control-M could be improved by offering more additional features and ensuring that more people are aware of Control-M."

More Control-M cons

"Another one that is probably a little bit bigger for me is that when there is an issue or there's an error, it writes on a different screen. I have to find the actual process name and go to a different screen to view the alert that got generated. On that screen, everyone's processes, not just the processes of the folks in my department, are thrown. It takes me a while to find the actual error so that I could go in there and look at the alert. It could be because of the way it was set up, but at least for me, it isn't too intuitive."

"One area where it could be improved is communication between the different servers. Sometimes there are processes that have already been completed but we get a status notification that they're still active."

"The scheduling mapping is a little disjointed. There is no wizard-type approach. There are a lot of different things that you have to do in completely different areas. They could probably add the functionality for creating all components of a mapping or an OPA schedule. The component creation could be done collectively rather than through individual components."

"In the next release, I would like the user experience to be improved. The user interface should be more appealing to gen-z."

"The UI is not intuitive, and it would be nice if there was a web interface."

"Rocket Zena is a mainframe-based job scheduler. I would like it to be more open so that we can use it on a distributed platform."

"In the web interface, it stacks the tasks across the top, and they accumulate until you close or clean those out. That seems a little cumbersome. You must right-click and close all tabs constantly to keep the console clean and manage your views."

"The documentation has room for improvement."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Take advantage of its scalability. You can start small. The initial cost is very reasonable. Once you have started picking up the tool and adopting it, then you can scale up from there and buy more agents."

"Definitely check how many single processes you want to run and count them as jobs. That is how you would work out your pricing on JAMS. For example, if you're running a number of commands and you can put them all into one script and run that script, you can count that as one job."

"This is a good product at a fair price."

"The pricing of JAMS has not been an issue for us, as it has allowed us to save time."

"Our licensing is pretty cheap because we have a state solution. So, we pay only $1,000 a year."

"For what it does, the product is priced very well."

"There are no additional costs other than the license for Fortra's JAMS which is affordable."

"JAMS is relatively inexpensive, with additional costs only incurred for tags, other services, and optional support renewals."

More JAMS pricing and cost advice

"We have a license till 2024. We are good and satisfied with it."

"Cost-wise, it is good."

"Yearly licenses are based on the number of jobs."

"BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."

"It depends. It's packaged in such a way that you can buy the base model without all of the fancy stuff. You can try and keep your price similar to competitors. I guess it's natural throughout the world. It doesn't matter whether you're buying cell phones or something else. The best cell phone will always be more expensive."

"The pricing is moderate, not too low or too high compared to other solutions."

"It was a little bit pricey. They were proud of the product. A particular module was not free. However, BMC was able to negotiate that particular module into our whole contract itself without having to negotiate an individual price for that module. All that was included in a one-time negotiation, and we've signed a five-year contract on that."

"Its pricing is a little bit high. They could provide an enterprise-level license for an unlimited number of jobs. Currently, it is based on the number of jobs, and if you exceed the number of jobs, there are charges. For example, if your license is for 3,000 jobs per day, but you run 3,050 jobs, you will have to pay for the extra 50 jobs. They charge $120 per job. So, it is too costly."

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

"The pricing and the licensing are good. It is affordable and can be used to improve and optimize productivity."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

882,594 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

26%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

30%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	19

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	37
Midsize Enterprise	23
Large Enterprise	146

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Large Enterprise	6

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about JAMS?

I find the historical tracking feature of JAMS invaluable for reviewing past events.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JAMS?

They recently switched to subscription-based pricing, which increased. The price is fair considering the functionalit...

See all answers

What needs improvement with JAMS?

As far as we are using JAMS version 6, it looks good and there is nothing major to add about it. Everything is functi...

See all answers

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 b...

See all answers

What do you like most about Control-M?

First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?

From what I know about pricing, I would probably put Control-M in the expensive category, but you do pay for what you...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

AutoSys Workload Automation vs JAMS

Compared 9% of the time

Stonebranch vs JAMS

Compared 9% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs JAMS

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs JAMS

Compared 7% of the time

OpCon vs JAMS

Compared 3% of the time

More JAMS Competitors

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 13% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

ESP Workload Automation Intelligence vs Control-M

Compared 3% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

IBM Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 12% of the time

Rocket Zeke vs Rocket Zena

Compared 8% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 7% of the time

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Rocket Zena

Compared 7% of the time

Nintex Process Platform vs Rocket Zena

Compared 3% of the time

More Rocket Zena Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

JAMS

February 2026

Download JAMS product report

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

February 2026

Download Control-M product report

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena

January 2026

Download Rocket Zena product report

Also Known As

No data available

Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM

ASG-Zena

Interactive Demo

JAMS Software

BMC

Demo not available

Rocket Software

Overview

JAMS is an automation and job scheduling solution designed for workflow optimization, catering to businesses large and small with flexible licensing and integration options.

Offering both Core and Advanced packages, JAMS supports a range of environments from small teams to large-scale operations. Its standout features include integration with platforms like PowerShell, SQL, and SAP, coupled with capabilities such as dependency management and natural language scheduling. JAMS simplifies job management, centralizes workflows, and boosts productivity with its robust automation features. Customizable workflows and insightful logging make it adaptable for diverse needs, supported by responsive customer service ensuring seamless operations.

What are JAMS's key features?

Automation & Scheduling: Flexible automation helps manage complex job schedules efficiently.
Integration: Connects seamlessly with platforms like SQL Server, SAP, and Python for diverse applications.
Centralized Job Management: A unified interface for handling thousands of jobs daily.
Dependency Management: Supports complex workflows with efficient dependency tracking.
Insightful Logging: Provides detailed logs and notifications for precise task execution.

What benefits should users look for in JAMS reviews?

Enhanced Productivity: Automates repetitive tasks, freeing up resources for strategic initiatives.
Scalability: Flexible licensing models grow with business size and needs.
Efficient Workflow Automation: Streamlines job orchestration across environments.
Responsive Support: Helps ensure smooth operations with quick troubleshooting.

In industries, JAMS is employed for automating workflows and managing batch jobs. Organizations utilize it for SSIS, SQL Server tasks, file transfers, and integrating with vendor systems, achieving efficient file automation and data management. Scheduler enables precise execution of thousands of tasks daily, enhancing operational efficiency.

JAMS Software

Control-M, from BMC, provides robust orchestration capabilities for managing hybrid cloud workflows, available both on-premise and as a SaaS option. Control-M from BMC supports growing teams in automating and scheduling enterprise workload processes.

Control-M serves as a versatile tool for businesses, enabling automation across diverse platforms like SAP, mainframes, and cloud environments. It simplifies job scheduling with an intuitive GUI and integrates with multiple applications and platforms. Users benefit from managed file transfers, role-based administration, and self-service portals, enhancing security and workflow management. While the platform offers comprehensive alerting, reporting, and batch impact management, feedback has highlighted areas for improvement such as more flexible job execution, enhanced reporting capabilities, and better integration with third-party tools. Additionally, licensing costs and support during upgrades are common concerns. Organizations value Control-M for its ability to facilitate secure file transfers and support business-critical operations, minimizing manual intervention and ensuring efficiency.

What are the key features of Control-M?

Automation Capabilities: Control-M automates and orchestrates workflows seamlessly across platforms.
Integration: It works with multiple applications and environments for enhanced connectivity.
Intuitive GUI: Simplifies scheduling, monitoring, and management of jobs with ease.
Managed File Transfer: Securely facilitates and manages file transfers.
Cross-Platform Support: Ensures seamless operations across various systems like SAP and mainframes.

What benefits should you look for in Control-M reviews?

Operational Reliability: Improves efficiency and SLA compliance with reliable performance.
User Autonomy: Allows self-service for various users, enhancing independence.
Security: Strengthens security with advanced administration and file management.
Cost-Effectiveness: Provides orchestrated solutions with cost considerations.
Enhanced Efficiency: Reduces manual tasks, allowing teams to focus on strategic goals.

Control-M is instrumental in industries managing complex workflows and IT operations. In finance, it offers accurate real-time data processing. Supply chain sectors benefit from its orchestration capabilities to streamline operations and minimize disruption. IT departments leverage integration capabilities to optimize workflow processes, ensuring seamless application management.

BMC

Rocket Zena offers scheduling and dependency mapping, intuitive interface, and containerized deployment. It simplifies workflow automation, enhancing efficiency across platforms.

Rocket Zena's strengths lie in its scheduling capabilities, graphical interface, and efficient deployment. It supports users in task management with cross-platform scheduling, streamlining repetitive tasks through automation. The web-based client facilitates process visualization and workflow management, while the notification system enhances task handling. Users can manage mainframe, Linux, and Windows environments while integrating with SAP and Oracle, ensuring comprehensive automation and efficient job execution.

What are the key features of Rocket Zena?

Scheduling and Dependency Mapping: Manages tasks efficiently with a graphical interface.
Containerized Deployment: Simplifies deployment and improves efficiency.
FTP Capabilities: Facilitates secure file transfers and backups.
Web-based Client and Whiteboard: Enhances process visualization and control.
Cross-Platform Scheduling: Automates repetitive tasks, reducing manual intervention.

What benefits and ROI should users expect?

Enhanced Efficiency: Automates complex tasks, freeing time for value-added work.
Improved Accuracy: Minimizes manual errors with reliable automation.
Streamlined Task Management: Simplifies workflow with intuitive notification systems.
Easy Integration: Supports SAP, Oracle, and other enterprise platforms.

In industries like finance and manufacturing, Rocket Zena plays a vital role in scheduling batch jobs and automating file transfers. It helps adapt task scheduling to business calendars and integrate with existing platforms, ensuring a smooth workflow that meets business objectives.

Rocket Software

Sample Customers

Teradata, Arconic, General Dynamics, Yum!, CVS Health, Comcast, Ghiradelli, & Boston’s Children’s Hospital

The Bank of East Asia, LINE Bank Taiwan, Coop, Air Europa, Carrefour, Itau Unibanco, Snam, Embraer, ANZ Bank, EDP, Dominio's, Tampa General Hospital, W&W Informatik GmbH, Veterans General, Up Sí Vale, Sky Italia, REWE digital GmbH, Raymond James, Railinc, Navistar, Management Science Associates, Colruyt, CARFAX, Banpara, Aspiag Service, Amadeus, AG Insurance, ING Bank Slaski

Fraternidad Muprespa

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

January 2026

Free Report: Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. Rocket Zena and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,594 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Control-M vs. Rocket Zena report.

See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.

We monitor all Workload 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.