AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M vs Rocket Zena comparison

Broadcom and BMC are both solutions in the Workload Automation category. Broadcom is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.0, while BMC is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.5. Broadcom holds a 10.5% mindshare in WA, compared to BMC’s 19.9% mindshare. Additionally, 94% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 98% of BMC users who would recommend it.

AutoSys Workload Automation

Read 82 AutoSys Workload Automation reviews

6,729 Views
5,922 Comparison Views

94% willing to recommend

Control-M

Read 124 Control-M reviews

20,716 Views
15,744 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

Rocket Zena

Read 8 Rocket Zena reviews

1,399 Views
1,399 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

AutoSys Workload Automation

Control-M

Rocket Zena

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between AutoSys Workload Automation, Control-M, and Rocket Zena based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation.

To learn more, read our detailed Workload Automation Report (Updated: August 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Workload Automation

August 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 864,574 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:

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of AutoSys Workload Automation is 10.5%, down from 17.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 19.9%, down from 26.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zena is 2.6%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Workload Automation

Featured Reviews

Antony Askew

Technical Lead at Natwest

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 While the current UI is a bit outdated, it's undergoing improvement.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.

Read full review

Ujjwal Sachdeva

Data scientist at Advarisk

Efficient automation and boosted workflow but needs better integration methods

Control-M is a bit faster compared to other solutions. The job and coding are easier. Also, my DevOps and Ops teams work collaboratively with it, enhancing its efficiency. The workflow is much easier compared to the ACS services we were using. Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.

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

"It has helped to simplify cross-dependency between MVS and Open systems jobs."

"AutoSys Workload Automation is a stable solution."

"AutoSys Workload Automation is scalable."

"The customized views that each individual can create, and views that can be made free-form, makes this very popular with the programmers."

"The benefits I have seen from AutoSys Workload Automation are significant; I would say it is about ease of administration."

"It is very valuable for us when we are trying to arrange or orchestrate jobs into a system. It is helpful for triggering jobs for a scheduled task."

"The initial setup is easy."

"AutoSys significantly reduces manual effort."

More AutoSys Workload Automation pros

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

"A large bank in South Africa would have more than one million jobs to be run each and every night. If something goes wrong in the middle of a million jobs, it can be very complicated if you're managing that via scripts or manually. Control-M solves that problem."

"It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic."

"The multiple scheduling options allow you to do anything you want, whenever you want, and however you want. You can easily be in control when things happen."

"It provides a unified view where you can orchestrate and monitor all your application workloads and data pipelines. That's very important because with cloud, software as a service, edge computing, traditional data center, and legacy apps, there are all these environments. If you don't have that single pane of glass or that one place to look at, you're going to invest a lot of time and resources into tracking things down when they go wrong."

"I find Control-M for SAP and Control-M for Informatica good. You can connect to the Linux or Windows servers, and you can run multiple jobs."

"The Control-M interface is good for creating, monitoring, and ensuring the delivery of files as part of our data pipeline. There's a wealth of information in both the full client, as well as the web interface that they have. Both are very easy to use and provide all the necessary material to understand how to do various tasks. The help feature is very useful and informative and everything is very easy to understand."

"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."

More Control-M pros

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

Cons

"Pricing model for distributed should have an Enterprise option."

"AutoSys Workload Automation could improve in the Linux environment. The previous versions of the AutoSys Workload Automation let you take the profile of the user that you were using to run the tasks that you're going to automate, but in the latest versions, you can't do that, you need to make more definitions and it's a little bit difficult. It was easier in the previous versions."

"Documentation and cross-application externals could be improved."

"I am not sure whether it is our limitation or a tool limitation because we haven't yet explored it, but whenever we look for different types of reporting, we have some limitations in getting those. It could be because of the way we have set it up internally in our enterprise, but it would be helpful if we can customize the reporting features and some of the alerts that can go out. When we connect enterprise systems, each one looks for a different use case, and if we can get different types of reporting, it will be helpful."

"The solution could improve by having support for container environments."

"Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated."

"CA Workload Automation is not part of CA's strategic vision going forward."

"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."

More AutoSys Workload Automation cons

"The infrastructure could be improved."

"In general, it is a very good product, and we are very happy with it. It meets all of our expectations."

"I've never been very successful when researching ways to utilize Batch Impact Manager. It's a tool to set up dummy jobs in your job flow and it's supposed to come back to you and say, 'Okay, for this job flow, you are 50 percent complete at a certain point in time'...I would like things like Batch Impact Manager to be a little more user-friendly, out-of-the-box."

"For installing or upgrading the PeopleSoft and SAP plugins, currently there is no way to do it via Control-M Configuration Manager. So, we are installing or upgrading the plugins, like PeopleSoft and SAP, manually. If BMC could provide an option via Control-M Configuration Manager to upgrade these plugins, it probably would reduce a lot of manual work as well as ease our work. This is one improvement that I personally want to see, because it would help our way of working."

"A lot of the areas of improvement revolve around Automation API because that area is constantly evolving. It is constantly changing, and it is constantly being updated. There are some bugs that are introduced from one version to the next. So, the regression testing doesn't seem to capture some of the bugs that have been fixed in prior versions, and those bugs are then reintroduced in later versions."

"The history module only contains a maximum of 10 days, but we would like to have access to more. For example, it would be helpful to have 30 days or two months of history available."

"I do not have any specific suggestions for additional features that should be included in the next release."

"Some of the documentation could use some improvement, however, it gets you from point A to point B pretty quickly to get the solution in place."

More Control-M cons

"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."

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

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

"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."

"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 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."

"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

"I certainly think the pricing is worth the value."

"It is overpriced."

"The pricing needs to be improved. Some of my client's complained that it was too expensive."

"The return on investment would be very high because doing things manually without this product would be extremely expensive."

"CA pricing has been a problem, and not looked upon favorably here at all."

"The price of this solution is reasonable and there is an annual license required."

"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."

"There is an annual license to use AutoSys Workload Automation."

More AutoSys Workload Automation pricing and cost advice

"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."

"Pricing can be steep, but you get what you pay for."

"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 account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost."

"As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost."

"This is now from my previous years as support for banks and big companies. If it's not enterprise scale, I find that it's too expensive for smaller companies. You really have to be quite big and need to have a dedicated support staff to run it, then you'll be fine. What we've seen at smaller companies, it's too expensive because they want to automate everything. Now, stuff that can literally run once a day for the rest of their lives is costing them $3 a job a day. It becomes too expensive, eventually. They are not seeing the return on investment because it's not business critical. Nobody is going to die or they're going to lose money if that job didn't run exactly at 11 minutes past 4:00. It's definitely for bigger enterprise companies, especially banks or healthcare providers. We have had an instance where Control-M was unavailable due to external factors for 20 minutes and there was a loss of almost a million euros because the solution involved logistics."

"It is not bad. The company can afford it, and it pays for itself. We have those jobs running automatically."

"Cost-wise, it is good."

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

864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

46%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

27%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

29%

Insurance Company

13%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

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 b...

See all answers

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 starte...

See all answers

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 $120,0...

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?

Its cost can be more competitive. One of the main things customers look at is the cost. It's not affordable. The cost...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Control-M?

Control-M could be improved on the reporting side. There can be better reporting on tasks and better dashboard capabi...

See all answers

Do you have any tips for managing my company's modernization, without any disruptions?

Today, we will look at the legacy systems, the red flags that point at the system getting old and rusty, and the ways...

See all answers

Comparisons

Automic Automation vs AutoSys Workload Automation

Compared 9% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs AutoSys Workload Automation

Compared 7% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs AutoSys Workload Automation

Compared 5% of the time

Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform vs AutoSys Workload Automation

Compared 5% of the time

Stonebranch vs AutoSys Workload Automation

Compared 5% of the time

More AutoSys Workload Automation Competitors

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

ESP Workload Automation Intelligence vs Control-M

Compared 4% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

IBM Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 16% of the time

Rocket Zeke vs Rocket Zena

Compared 15% of the time

JAMS vs Rocket Zena

Compared 5% of the time

Stonebranch vs Rocket Zena

Compared 3% of the time

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Rocket Zena

Compared 3% of the time

More Rocket Zena Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

AutoSys Workload Automation

August 2025

Download AutoSys Workload Automation product report

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

August 2025

Download Control-M product report

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena

July 2025

Download Rocket Zena product report

Also Known As

CA Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation AE

Control M

ASG-Zena

Interactive Demo

Demo not available

Broadcom

BMC

Demo not available

Rocket Software

Overview

AutoSys Workload Automation efficiently manages complex workloads across platforms, offering high availability and seamless platform integration. Its reliability and scalability are valued for enterprise-level automation, enhancing job management and reducing manual effort with robust scheduling and advanced security.

AutoSys Workload Automation is known for its user-friendly capabilities, effectively handling cross-platform job scheduling with mainframe integration. It supports high availability, ensuring reliable performance for critical operations. Despite enhancements needed in its GUI and integration capabilities, AutoSys remains effective for batch processing, file transfers, ETL, and managing dependencies across servers and applications. Improvements are suggested for deployment complexity and monitoring features. More effective licensing and scalability solutions, along with modern subscription models and cloud integration, could address cost and automation barriers.

What are AutoSys Workload Automation's key features?

Robust Scheduling: Automates job scheduling across multiple platforms efficiently.
Advanced Security: Ensures secure management of workloads.
High Availability: Maintains performance during critical operations.
Platform Integration: Seamlessly integrates with diverse systems.
Scalability: Supports growing enterprise demands.

What benefits should users expect from AutoSys Workload Automation?

Reduced Manual Effort: Minimizes manual task management.
Enhanced Job Management: Improves oversight and control over job processes.
Flexibility in Scheduling: Offers adaptable scheduling and monitoring options.
Reliability: Consistent job execution without failures.
Security: Protects enterprise-level operations.

In industries like banking, insurance, and retail, AutoSys Workload Automation facilitates 24/7 automated job execution, ensuring smooth task automation. It allows companies to manage enterprise workloads effectively, catering to batch processing, file transfers, and handling job dependencies in a consistent manner.

Broadcom

Control-M by BMC offers orchestration for hybrid cloud workflows, starting at $29,000 annually. It's designed for teams managing dependencies efficiently with automation and scheduling capabilities.

Control-M is known for its automation, integration, and scheduling capabilities. It provides a user-friendly GUI for seamless third-party application integration and robust file transfer capabilities. Role-based administration features, self-service portals, and the ability to handle complex workflows enhance operational efficiency. Its control modules enable diverse integrations, while forecasting, monitoring, and alerting functionalities improve reliability and adaptability across platforms, making it essential for orchestrating tasks efficiently.

What are Control-M's key features?

User-Friendly GUI: Offers intuitive interface for easy navigation.
Seamless Third-Party Integration: Facilitates smooth interaction with other tools.
Robust File Transfer: Ensures reliable and secure data movement.
Role-Based Administration: Enhances security and access control.
Self-Service Portal: Enables users to manage tasks independently.
Forecasting and Monitoring: Provides predictive insights for better planning.

What benefits and ROI should users look for?

Operational Efficiency: Streamlines processes and reduces manual tasks.
Improved Reliability: Minimizes errors with automated workflows.
Real-Time Insights: Offers visibility into job performance and system status.
Scalability: Adapts to growing business needs.
Integration Flexibility: Supports diverse applications and environments.

Control-M is vital in industries like financial services, data management, and IT operations. It automates batch processing, job automation, and file transfers, supporting applications such as SAP, Oracle, and Informatica. This enhances transparency, reduces errors, and provides insights into job performance and system status.

BMC

Rocket Zena automates and schedules tasks across mainframe, Linux, and Windows environments, reducing human errors and managing dependencies.

Rocket Zena serves as a powerful tool for scheduling and automating tasks across multiple platforms. Its capabilities extend to managing batch jobs, ETLs, SFTP transfers, database backups, organizing workflows, running scripts, managing payroll tasks, and customizing schedules to avoid manual interventions. Users benefit from a user-friendly interface and efficient containerized deployment with clear process visualization through diagram and whiteboard features. The platform supports file transfers, automates workflows, saves time, and reduces errors, with straightforward licensing and commendable technical support.

What are the most important features?

User-Friendly Interface: Easy to navigate for efficient task management.
Cross-Platform Job Scheduling: Simplifies task automation across different environments.
Containerized Deployment: Ensures efficient resource use and deployment.
Diagram and Whiteboard Features: Visualizes processes clearly for better understanding.
FTP File Transfers: Facilitates seamless file transfer between systems.
Workflow Automation: Saves time and minimizes errors with automated workflows.
Straightforward Licensing: Offers clear and simple licensing options.
Commendable Technical Support: Provides reliable customer support and assistance.

What benefits or ROI should users look for?

Reduced Human Errors: Automation lowers the chance of mistakes in repetitive tasks.
Time Savings: Efficient scheduling and automation allow for quicker task completion.
Improved Process Management: Enhanced organization and visualization of workflows.
Dependable Support: Access to reliable technical assistance when needed.

Rocket Zena sees implementations in industries requiring robust task scheduling and automation such as finance for managing payroll and database backups, healthcare for handling ETL operations and workflow organization, and IT for running scripts and managing batch jobs. Adaptation to industry-specific needs showcases its versatility, although users seek improvements in scheduling mapping, UI navigation, and desire cloud availability.

Rocket Software

Sample Customers

Gaumont, Mercantil do Brasil, CCEE, Hanwha Life

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc

Fraternidad Muprespa

Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: August 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

864,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.