No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

CloudDat vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 13, 2026

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

CloudDat
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Control-M
Ranking in Managed File Transfer (MFT)
2nd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
218
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Managed File Transfer (MFT) category, the mindshare of CloudDat is 0.9%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 6.3%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed File Transfer (MFT) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Control-M6.3%
CloudDat0.9%
Other92.8%
Managed File Transfer (MFT)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2847603 - PeerSpot reviewer
Quality Engineering Specialist at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
Cloud platform has transformed real-time patient vitals monitoring and protects sensitive data
Improvement-wise for CloudDat, I think some days there is some latency. The scaling must be fast enough, but sometimes it avoids delays. That is one challenge we had. Sometimes the server might be down and there would be some downtime. That is one thing which we had a challenge with. When you use any policies, particular policies in that features, there would be some predictive analytics to improve that efficiency. It's more of having to always see what are the new features they have added and get advanced to that. That's one of the challenges we faced. In a real-time, one more thing is our project handles HIPAA, so it is always used by many users. Their scaling is also one of the features which we had a challenge with, actually. Regarding needed improvements for CloudDat, documentation-wise, from cloud, there are certain features where you can directly download, but that would not help you actually. You have to always be updated to cloud features. There are certain versions every time it gets updated and you have to always get updated to those new features. Documentation matters from previous to new features, all that. In real-time, I maintain a documentation which ensures every time what was in past and what is present and what we can do more in the coming days so that it can be more clear so that we have anything handled in a performance way. It should be documented and it is already documented. An improvement needed for CloudDat that I haven't mentioned yet is that it should secure more cloud dashboards to monitor patient vitals in real-time. As of now in IT, since I'm into healthcare, it generally helps with leaking risk of any particular patient's information, but in the dashboard, you will come to know everything. That's where I think it should hide. That's one feature I see which needs to be changed.
RP
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Time-saving is one of the most crucial and one of the best features over here in CloudDat."
"It is simple to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines and to ingest data from different platforms. It integrates well between platforms."
"It is definitely a good tool in the business intelligence domain, which can be used for small or big batch runs."
"Control-M also provides low-code and no-code capabilities that allow business users to work on workflow orchestration in a straightforward manner."
"Control-M has enabled true enterprise batch automation, which combined with the other BMC Control products on our mainframe platform, allows us to run a 24/7 site with the lights out."
"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer is highly stable; it is enterprise-grade software, and even when doing a job of 10,000 to 20,000, the solution is very stable."
"Offers a single pane of glass to our enterprise batchworkload automation environment."
"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 scheduling and management were really good. Monitoring was also better. It had a good visual presentation. It showed me charts and all such things. It was really good on that side."
 

Cons

"Improvement-wise for CloudDat, I think some days there is some latency."
"Implementing it is not straightforward. It requires careful installation, customization, and configuration."
"Offering it as open source for free would be great, however, that's unlikely."
"Control-M SaaS is very expensive."
"Their website at the time was horrible."
"The only thing that comes to mind is the cost. If it could be more competitive, it would be great."
"One thing we have criticized is the MFTE capabilities, particularly regarding high availability. BMC hasn't provided a setup with multiple fallbacks for error situations."
"Area of improvement would be if it could attach anything other than .txt files as output files."
"BMC could do better in the reporting capabilities of Control-M. Currently, what they have is very limited in reporting."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"This solution is very expensive compared to others in the market. Previously it was the only solution in our country to offer this kind of functionality. However, technology has caught up and many competitors offer the same at a lower price."
"Apart from the standard license, if we avail any additional features, there's an extra cost. For example, Workload Archiving is an additional feature from the standard product, so we pay extra for that."
"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."
"Its cost is a little bit higher than other solutions such as AutoSys or DAC. For the demo, there were some plans, such as start plan, scale plan, etc. Pricing was based on the plan."
"The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."
"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."
"Yearly licenses are based on the number of jobs."
"The license model is based on the number of tasks or jobs required. The price overall is expensive. In my country, we don't have any choice but to use them because no one can match their capability."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed File Transfer (MFT) solutions are best for your needs.
909,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
24%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business43
Midsize Enterprise28
Large Enterprise177
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with CloudDat?
Improvement-wise for CloudDat, I think some days there is some latency. The scaling must be fast enough, but sometimes it avoids delays. That is one challenge we had. Sometimes the server might be ...
What is your primary use case for CloudDat?
My main use case for CloudDat is storing, processing, and analyzing data. At my project and company, we use platforms like AWS instead of some servers. This really helps when data is handled in rea...
What advice do you have for others considering CloudDat?
I can share specific outcomes related to time saved with CloudDat. You don't need to always access it each time. If a user can have multiple access to a particular cloud, then he can run in multipl...
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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
Control-M sits at the premium end of workload automation pricing — that is no secret, and I will not pretend otherwise. My position after decades of using it: the enterprise value justifies the pre...
What needs improvement with Control-M?
My main improvement point after decades with the product is not a feature — it is the path to mastery. Basic administration of Control-M is fairly accessible: a new person can define and monitor jo...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

castLabs
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
Find out what your peers are saying about Fortra, BMC, IBM and others in Managed File Transfer (MFT). Updated: August 2026.
909,701 professionals have used our research since 2012.