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 882,180 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

"JAMS is easier to use and cheaper than our previous solution. The installation is more straightforward, and JAMS has a graphical user interface, so it's more accessible."

"The most valuable feature of JAMS is its user-friendly interface, especially after upgrading from version six to seven."

"JAMS has improved our productivity immensely because everything flows. I don't think we could operate at our current staffing levels without it."

"JAMS offers diverse scheduling capabilities for any kind of job, including Linux, PowerShell scripts, and SQL, enabling automation of jobs, which has proven beautiful after three years of usage."

"The ability to sequence jobs is excellent; it means we don't have to schedule them individually, and if one fails, it doesn't unwind the entire workflow."

"The most valuable aspect of JAMS is its robustness."

"The dashboard is intuitive."

"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."

More JAMS pros

"The ability to dynamically predict batch run time is so valuable."

"In the client, it provides a unified view for me. I can alter the view that I want to see jobs and conditions. This is nice to have. The fact that you can see everything in one space is very important, especially these days where everything is about data and monitoring as well as because we are working from home on a global basis. So, I can monitor jobs in real-time, along with any failures or anything that might be stuck. The real-time monitoring and the ability to see everything in one place is important for us because we operate 24/7."

"It's a user-friendly tool."

"The most valuable thing is that it works as advertised. We don't take advantage of some of the features like we should because that's not our primary role and responsibility in the environment that we manage. We only want to make sure that a file gets to where it was supposed to go, or we pull in a file and it comes to us correctly."

"The integration with ServiceNow is good. When a job ends and there are problems with it, we automatically open an incident in this platform, and the number of the incident is forwarded to Control-M. This means that we have a record of it with the log of the job."

"Before Control-M, we didn't have a centralized view and could not view what happened in the past to determine what will happen in the future. The Gantt view that we have in Control-M is like a project view. It is nice because we sometimes have some application maintenance that we need to do. So, in a single console, we can hold the jobs for the next hour or two. We can release that job when it is finished. This is a really nice feature that we didn't have before. It is something really simple, but we didn't previously have a console where we could say, "For the next two hours, what are the jobs that we will run? And, hold these jobs not to run." This is really important."

"The most valuable features of Control-M are automation and orchestration. It allows a different schedule, and we can manage thousands of jobs. It ensures we can complete them on time accurately. This automation reduces our manual intervention, significantly reducing error."

"It integrates seamlessly with other tools within our ecosystem."

More Control-M pros

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

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

"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."

Cons

"The product does not allow the users to cut and paste the job names from the screen."

"I want JAMS to implement a global search function."

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

"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."

"JAMS has built-in reporting. I've never really used it. I tried using it a few years ago and I couldn't figure it out. It was wonky. It could be improved upon."

"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."

"I'm not sure if they have fixed it in a newer version, but there is no global search in the version I have. If I have multiple sub-folders that are named for business units, like HR or IT, and I have to search for a job, I cannot search from the top. I have to go to the HR folder to search for a particular job, or to the IT folder."

"The ACL or access permission area needs to be improved. When it comes to defining and providing security permissions, it's a bit confusing if you are new to JAMS. JAMS needs to improve the features for security access or permissions."

More JAMS cons

"Control-M reporting is a bit of a pain point right now. Control-M doesn't have robust reporting. I would like to see better reporting options. I would like to be able to pull charts or statistics that look nicer. Right now, we can pull some data, but it is kind of choppy. It would be nicer to have enterprise-level reporting that you can present to managers."

"Currently, the history module captures only seven days of job execution data, and if we had at least 30 days available, that would be beneficial for investigating any issues."

"We have some plug-ins like BOBJ, and we need a little improvement there. Other than that, it has been pretty good. I haven't seen any issues."

"An area for improvement in BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is integration. It should be compatible with more solutions. It should have integrations with newer applications as well."

"I would like not to have to reach out to a third-party application company to do automated notifications. Right now, we still have people manually calling people and emailing people. There's a company called xMatters - and there are others - that has an API through Control-M that can automate any aspect of failure management. I'd like to see it build right into the product. I'd like to see a better notification product."

"Its initial setup is a bit complex. They could provide more documentation and tutorials to make the initial setup easier to understand. Enhancing the documentation could simplify the setup process."

"To make the solution a 10, there could be more automation."

"From a support perspective, BMC technical support needs improvements."

More Control-M cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Fortra's JAMS pricing structure has deteriorated significantly since its acquisition by Fortra."

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

"The product is reasonably priced, and we don't have any add-ons."

"It was $10,000 for the first year. Then, there is a maintenance cost for licensing every year that we get billed $5,000 for every year."

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

"The pricing is very fair. We have seen very minimal to no price increases over the years. We are not banging down the door of support all the time either. I would imagine if we were a company that submitted a dozen support tickets a week for the last nine years, then it might be a little different because we would be eating up everybody's time. However, for what we get out of it, the pricing is extremely fair. Back when we were originally looking and brought in JAMS, we were looking at a couple of the other competitive products that were in this space, but the pricing from JAMS was far and away better than what the other competitors could offer for the same functionality."

"It's certainly a lot cheaper than Tivoli and Control-M. In comparison to them, you get a lot more bang for your buck. You get pretty much the whole functionality and more, in some cases, when compared to Control-M, but at a fraction of the price."

"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."

More JAMS pricing and cost advice

"The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."

"It works on task-based licensing."

"Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more."

"I rate the solution's price a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is low or really affordable, and ten is high or really expensive. It is a really expensive tool."

"They are expensive. If we were a small company, it would be complicated because we have to have strong sales and operations to be able to afford a tool of this level. Being a large company, the cost-benefit is covered, but it is not within the level of cheap solutions."

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

"This is an expensive product compared to other solutions, although I think that it is a good one. We are in a good position with licensing, as we can run 10,000 jobs."

"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."

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

882,180 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

10%

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 8% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs JAMS

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs JAMS

Compared 7% of the time

UiPath Orchestrator vs JAMS

Compared 4% 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

Stonebranch 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

882,180 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.