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

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 30, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

AutoSys Workload Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Number of Reviews
79
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Control-M
Ranking in Workload Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Number of Reviews
114
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (2nd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2024, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of AutoSys Workload Automation is 16.8%, down from 18.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 27.0%, up from 25.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

it_user611985 - PeerSpot reviewer
Feb 19, 2017
Offers the ability to code schedules to run jobs in both the mainframe and distributed environments.
The most valuable feature is the ease of coding up schedules to run jobs in both the mainframe and distributed environments. Prior to installing ESP, we had to use two products: one for mainframe and one for distributed It allowed us to consolidate our monitoring down to one particular console in…
SS
Jul 15, 2024
It provides a centralized view of our enterprise workload
Control-M provides a centralized view of our enterprise workload. As the owner, I can access my dashboard and see the status of jobs across the enterprise. It is strong at integrating with different applications and creating a pipeline of dependencies across applications on different operating systems. When it comes to developments where we have to move across regions or environments, it seamlessly integrates and adapts to different regions. Regarding integration with the DevOps pipeline, it allows us to use a JSON file and promote it across environments easily. We use Control-M to deploy workflows for DataOps and DevOps initiatives. It allows us to quickly test workflows or configuration changes without much manual effort. We add the JSON file for the conversation parameters and let the system handle the schedule. Integrating other DevOps tools within the journey gives us the management perspective and approval of multiple pipelines.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The capabilities of the product to schedule on multiple platforms, multiple operating systems."
"This solution has made my clients' workplaces a lot less labor-intensive."
"The flexibility in solving job scheduling challenges allows us to successfully integrate an acquired business’ fiscal close with our own, even though there is a lot of variance as to when they run in the calendar month."
"We need to have things run in a very sequential order, so it is very useful that we can schedule the work flows."
"It works constantly and is pretty seamless. You do not have to open up many support tickets."
"The most valuable feature of AutoSys Workload Automation is user-friendliness. If someone has some knowledge of the tool they can use it."
"The ability to create calendars, calendering for batch jobs to run on a scheduled frequency."
"Without this product we would have to manually submit jobs and it would take longer. There would also be a much greater possibility of jobs running wrong and/or not at the right time."
"The solution is innovative. Specifically for the overseas and time differences, you can feel the efficiency of Batch Impact Manager on jobs, batch processing, and impact management. It works the best on these kinds of issues. It saves us time and money, which is important. We save a lot using Control-M."
"It is an enterprise tool that integrates with all the applications in our organization. It has made our life easier because we don't need to wake up at midnight and do monitoring, etc. It does everything. It also sends precautionary alerts. If a job or activity is running for more than the specified time, it alerts the application team. So, our teams do not need to sit in front of a laptop or any open application to watch the jobs. They can do their other regular activities while Control-M takes care of all the jobs. It notifies them when there is job completion, delay, and error."
"We value Control-M mainly for the ability to control multiple nodes in a coordinated manner. Control-M has the ability to really coordinate across a lot of nodes."
"The most valuable features are the Advanced File Transfer and the manage file transfer. They make transferring files securely seamless. It's very easy to set up, get deployed, and have it transferred to and from vendors. As long as we can get our firewall rules implemented at a decent time, it's very easy and seamless to get important files transferred in a secure manner."
"We use Control-M for maintenance on our Oracle and SQL Server databases. It automates maintenance on packages, including standard procedures on the databases themselves, snapshots, checking integrity, verifying the RDBMS of the databases, etc. It ensures they aren't clogged and that they are running smoothly and that there aren't any jobs stuck, eating up the performance of the server or any of the CPU cores."
"The most valuable features are the GUI console, stability, and workflow."
"Control-M is excellent when it comes to building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows. Those workflows are of very high importance to our operations."
"The best part about this product is that it has a lot of features. Control-M doesn't limit us and we can use it for a lot of things."
 

Cons

"AutoSys Workload Automation could improve the integration."
"Documentation and cross-application externals could be improved."
"The reporting system, currently, could be better."
"​The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement."
"Needs better documentation with fully explained examples for some of the job types."
"We have to escalate through channels to get to somebody who knows what's going on. It takes time that we do not necessarily have.​"
"To make it a lot more user-friendly, in order to make it so other people can use it without having to do much training with it; the more user-friendly it is, the easier it is to work with."
"An area for improvement in AutoSys Workload Automation is that it lacks advanced features or advanced built-in functionalities found in competitors, for example, an advanced workflow feature. Even the handling or notification from AutoSys Workload Automation isn't the best in the industry. Other products have very good workflow-related functionalities such as ActiveBatch that's missing in AutoSys Workload Automation, so I wish the tool had those features."
"Right now, Control-M is the leader in EMA analysis, which is similar to Gartner. However, clients want to invest in a strong technology, and therefore this product needs to keep up with the high expectations set for it."
"I would like to see them adopt more cloud. Most companies don't have a single cloud, meaning we have data sources that come from different cloud providers. That may have been solved already, but supporting Azure would be an improvement because companies tend not to have only AWS and GCP."
"We develop software. More frequently, we are working with microservices and APIs, using our integration tool, MuleSoft. While Control-M is really a good tool to integrate with other tools, it is important for them to continue improving their microservices and API."
"We did encounter a few scalability issues. Sometimes, there are too many jobs in our environment on different servers, but that’s not the tool issue, we can simply increase the FS size. However, that requires bank cost; hence the scalability issue."
"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."
"They can improve their interface."
"In general, it is a very good product, and we are very happy with it. It meets all of our expectations."
"While they have a very good reporting facility, the reports that I'm asked to produce, a lot of times aren't necessarily what we need."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CA pricing has been a problem, and not looked upon favorably here at all."
"There is an annual license to use AutoSys Workload Automation."
"Validate how many agents you need beforehand."
"The pricing needs to be improved. Some of my client's complained that it was too expensive."
"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."
"We paid to use the solution monthly."
"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."
"The price of this solution is reasonable and there is an annual license required."
"The pricing of Control-M is reasonable."
"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."
"Cost-wise, it is good."
"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."
"The license model is based on the number of jobs we run on the SaaS application or the number of executions, unlike the on-premise model options. If we have a handful of jobs, it's always good to consider Control-M, but if it's a large number of jobs, Control-M might not be a great option."
"Pricing varies depending on which components and modules you are using."
"It works on task-based licensing."
"You must accept that BMC licensing can be very confusing. No one can easily understand how they calculate things, whether it is user-based, job-based, or server-based. The calculation is quite tough. How BMC calculates licensing is not easily available anywhere."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
805,335 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
47%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
7%
Insurance Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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 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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
The product price is reasonable. I rate the pricing an eight.
What needs improvement with Control-M?
We're upgrading Control-M, and the process is very long. There are numerous boxes to tick and things to check to ensure everything is in order before the upgrade happens. We run three instances of ...
 

Also Known As

CA Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation AE
Control M
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Gaumont, Mercantil do Brasil, CCEE, Hanwha Life
CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Find out what your peers are saying about AutoSys Workload Automation vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: September 2024.
805,335 professionals have used our research since 2012.