Control-M vs IBM Workload Automation comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
SMA Technologies Logo
3,831 views|941 comparisons
BMC Logo
34,858 views|13,629 comparisons
IBM Logo
6,059 views|4,258 comparisons
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Control-M and IBM Workload Automation based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Workload Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Control-M vs. IBM Workload Automation Report (Updated: November 2022).
657,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"The biggest example in which OpCon has improved my organization is that we have to download and process files from the federal reserve several times a day. If we don't do it in a certain timeframe, we can be penalized. It's the fact that we can download these files, process them, get our accounting teams the information they need to work the exceptions that is one of the most important roles.""The whole product is valuable to us because of the integrations that it has with the MCP and the Windows environments. You have to have the agent on each one of them that you want to monitor. The integrations that we have created are along the lines of extracting files and sending them through SFTP to another vendor. Those are the things that were taking a lot of time away from my staff.""The most valuable feature is the automation in general.""Reliability is always important, and the reliability of the system is outstanding.""File Watcher can run jobs when files are made available in a folder.""Thus far we have only had a few minor problems, all of which the vendor addressed quickly. We have not encountered any major problems. The product is very stable and reliable.""Having the jobs laid out while attaching dependencies is a nice addition to the program.""MAS is by far the best feature, although not a feature of the software specifically. MAS has more knowledge than our employees, so we have been able to develop schedules that are far beyond our own skillset."

More OpCon Pros →

"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.""My organization has been able to script scheduled jobs in Control-M to potentially replace legacy products that are at end of life or end of service. The previous backup applications that were being used for specific files, folders, or applications were no longer being supported, therefore being able to use Control-M to replace that has been very valuable.""It has a very good GUI. We can search for a job very easily. The web interface, user account creation, and access control are very good. From an access control point of view, we can provide access to as many users as we want. A second group of users can be given a certain number of features, according to the requirements. The web interface is very easy for end users to login and use. A lot of features have been added, e.g., adding jobs. They can add jobs to their stuff, whatever they want, then get it validated by the scheduling team and work it into production.""It is simple to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines and to ingest data from different platforms. It integrates well between platforms.""It has multiple features. You can plan your execution in Control-M. It provides one single window where you can define workflows regardless of geographic boundaries and platforms. A batch process can be executed from this single window. It provides insights into your processes. Your business people will know what process they are running and what is the state of the process. Instead of knowing that they're not going to meet the SLA the next morning, the business people immediately know the changes in their process. Control-M is very easy. I can tell a non-technical person that this is how it works, and he would be able to easily understand it. Business people can understand the methodology of Control-M and the intuitive features that it has. It has a fantastic graphical user interface and is easy to understand. You just have to drag and drop but in a very intuitive way. Monitoring features are also good. It has different color coding schemes, which can help you to understand the status of your workflow. An operator who is not that technical and is just monitoring the status of the application can see by color-coding the status of a process. If anything goes wrong or a process is stuck, it gives you a hint. You can just right-click and see the logs and the output. Even if the system is not right there in the data center and is located somewhere else, you can monitor it right from there and see the workflows.""In our bank, all new applications need to be implemented with Control-M. We try to look for the best way to establish communication between both products. One of the new features for us is Application Integrator. It is a very interesting feature because it lets us integrate with those applications that are not included in Control-M. By using Application Integrator, we can easily integrate new technologies. With the help of Application Integrator, we recently integrated with Blue Prism, which is a robotic product. We could integrate such processes into Control-M. Now, we are working with Ansible, and we are putting Ansible automated processes into Control-M.""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 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."

More Control-M Pros →

"The project we worked on involved the running of nearly 24,000 job instances in a single day, so I would say that the solution is stable.""This solution has a request feature where users can request the added features they need to have developed. Based on client voting for those features, these are developed and released.""The support from Cisco is very good. I was with them as a company for 40 years""The whole product is valuable because it is a tool for batch automation."

More IBM Workload Automation Pros →

Cons
"It would be great if you could create physically separate "clients," as I call them. I wish I could have a production client and a testing client and that they would be separate.""Enterprise Manager is a little clunky which I know they're addressing in the solution's manager.""More functionality within self-service would be greatly appreciated.""We are still in the early stages of our implementation, so at this point, I cannot see any needed improvements or features.""I would like to see OpCon being accessible using a mobile app.""A way to select multiple jobs in the UI for a quick change or to hold, release, et cetera, would be nice.""Of course they have a RESTful API within OpCon, but they have that new web services agent that we installed because we have some SOAP APIs and we had to interact with SMA to get things running. Our developers did do some tweaks, but we have now been able to get some test jobs running, and understand how the workflow goes back and forth.""Stability is an area for improvement. There are FTP agents that run on the MCP and they are there so that we can transfer a file from the MCP to the Windows environment or vice versa. Sometimes, and nobody has been able to figure out why, it just goes down, and all of my jobs that need it are hanging or failing... It would be very helpful if they could figure out what in the world is happening with that FTP client that's on the MCP."

More OpCon Cons →

"An issue we have run into in our lower environments is that Control-M can log you out frequently.""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.""Integration with some applications and platforms is complex and requires development. We have done some integration with the application integrator, but it was more like a manual solution. This is an area that can be improved.""Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features.""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.""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 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.""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."

More Control-M Cons →

"The configuration of IBM Workload Automation has some challenges. We have a difficult time customizing it, but it is similar to other solutions.""The performance of the previous versions could be better.""This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly.""There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."

More IBM Workload Automation Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "OpCon cost us $80,000 in 2017 money, and that included everything: support, installation, onsite assistance during the conversion, etc. It's been a worthwhile investment by far."
  • "We currently renewed with one of their new technology bundles. It's around $36,000 annually. We run a query of our SQL in our SQL database to see how many jobs we run. They're charging us per usage and whatever add-ons you want to use with OpCon."
  • "It used to be per machine, so we had X number of devices licensed. Now it's not. If we had a lot of machines, the new license might've decreased the cost. Unfortunately, we didn't see the same gains."
  • More OpCon Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."
  • "This is an area where it is a little difficult to work with BMC. They want to do licenses by job, which is what we have. For example, the simplest is to license by job, but they can also license by nodes. While the licensing is simple to use, it might not be the correct licensing model for the customer. It is okay because we want to license by job, which is something measurable. At the end of the day, licensing by job is the most important."
  • "The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."
  • "You're going to spend a lot of money upfront, but the benefits you're going to get out of it are going to quickly pay for it."
  • "Initially, our licensing model was based on the number of jobs per day. That caused some issues because we were restricted to a number. So at our renewal time we said, 'We want to convert from number of jobs to number of endpoints.' That cost us extra money but it gave us additional capabilities, without worrying about the number of jobs."
  • "BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."
  • "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."
  • "There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."
  • More Control-M Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "It is about one-third of the cost of a controller."
  • "The contract is with the customer with whom we are working, so IBM is not directly involved in this."
  • "We transitioned from a server license to per job license, and that saved us a lot money."
  • More IBM Workload Automation Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
    657,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer:The most valuable feature is the automation in general.
    Top Answer:The licensing and pricing model changed this last year, so we're getting used to that. I think it's ultimately going to… more »
    Top Answer:I'm sure there's plenty that could be improved, but some of the biggest pain points aren't necessarily a fault of OpCon… more »
    Top Answer:Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful… more »
    Top Answer:Hi! I don't know the "Oracle DAC Scheduler", but I can say that in most competitive solutions Control-m stands out in… more »
    Top Answer:It is controlling our workflows, ingesting data, and then putting it up into our database platforms. In turn, those are… more »
    Top Answer:This solution has a request feature where users can request the added features they need to have developed. Based on… more »
    Top Answer:We transitioned from a server license to per job license, and that saved us a lot money.
    Top Answer:This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly.
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Control M
    IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler, IBM TWS
    Learn More
    Overview

    OpCon is a robust and flexible platform capable of scaling up to meet the needs of clients running 140,000+ daily jobs across multiple environments and operating systems. Our proven migration framework helps clients painlessly transition from outdated or cost inefficient platforms thanks to our deep organizational expertise, REST API, and extensive library of legacy connectors. We have a variety of consulting options available for clients and offer no-cost training for the life of the contract.

    Control-M simplifies application and data workflow orchestration on premises or as a service. It makes it easy to build, define, schedule, manage, and monitor production workflows, ensuring visibility, reliability, and improving SLAs.

    • Accelerate new business applications into production—by embedding workflow orchestration into your CI/CD pipeline
    • Scale Dev and Ops collaboration, with a Jobs-as-Code approach
    • Simplify workflows across hybrid and multi-cloud environments with AWS, Azure and Google Cloud Platform integrations
    • Deliver data-driven outcomes faster, managing big data workflows in a scalable way
    • Take control of your file transfer operations with integrated, intelligent file movement and visibility
    IBM Workload Automation is a complete solution for batch and real-time workload management, available for distributed mainframe or hosted in the cloud. Use it to drive business and IT workloads on hosted servers, with virtually no cost of ownership for your central server. Increase your productivity with powerful plan- and event-driven scheduling, and run and monitor your workloads wherever you are. This includes interfaces dedicated to application developers and operators, providing them both autonomy and precise governance.
    Offer
    Accel­er­ate dig­i­tal trans­for­ma­tion through work­load automation

    Automate repetitive tasks so you can focus on projects that drive your business forward. Find out how OpCon workload automation enables you to create repeatable, reliable workflows - all managed from a single platform.

    Learn more about Control-M
    Learn more about IBM Workload Automation
    Sample Customers
    LOHR, Carnival Cruise Lines, Herbalife, Digital Federal Credit Union, Synergent, Frandsen Bank & Trust
    CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
    Standard Life Group, Banca Popolare di Milano, A*STAR, ArcelorMittal Gent
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm78%
    Insurance Company8%
    Government4%
    Manufacturing Company2%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm29%
    Computer Software Company16%
    Insurance Company10%
    Manufacturing Company6%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm32%
    Computer Software Company13%
    Retailer8%
    Healthcare Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm25%
    Computer Software Company19%
    Insurance Company9%
    Comms Service Provider5%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm29%
    Manufacturing Company18%
    University6%
    Media Company6%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm30%
    Computer Software Company14%
    Insurance Company7%
    Comms Service Provider6%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business28%
    Midsize Enterprise41%
    Large Enterprise31%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business13%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise78%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business12%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise79%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise9%
    Large Enterprise77%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business7%
    Midsize Enterprise4%
    Large Enterprise89%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business10%
    Midsize Enterprise7%
    Large Enterprise83%
    Buyer's Guide
    Control-M vs. IBM Workload Automation
    November 2022
    Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. IBM Workload Automation and other solutions. Updated: November 2022.
    657,849 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 49 reviews while IBM Workload Automation is ranked 9th in Workload Automation with 4 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Control-M writes "Allows us to integrate file transfers more readily, resolve issues quickly, and orchestrate a diverse landscape of vendor products". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Workload Automation writes "A stable solution ". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation ESP, ASG-Zena, Automic Workload Automation and Micro Focus Operations Orchestration, whereas IBM Workload Automation is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, HCL Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, CA Workload Automation CA 7 and ActiveBatch Workload Automation. See our Control-M vs. IBM Workload Automation 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.