Control-M vs Make comparison

Read 4 Make reviews

375 Views
368 Comparison Views

80% willing to recommend

Control-M

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Control-M and Make compete in the workflow automation and orchestration category. Control-M has the upper hand in reliability for large-scale deployments, while Make excels in adaptability and a modern architecture approach.

Features: Control-M offers comprehensive workload automation, enhanced job monitoring, and error handling capabilities, making it suitable for complex enterprises. It supports a wide array of applications. Make stands out with integration capabilities, a cloud-friendly architecture, and intuitive workflow design, making it ideal for dynamic cloud-based operations.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Control-M uses a traditional on-premise or hybrid deployment model, benefiting larger enterprises needing robust customer support and detailed documentation. Make involves a cloud-native deployment model, offering easier and faster implementation with a focus on integration and responsive support.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M entails a higher initial setup cost reflective of its enterprise-level features, yielding significant ROI for handling complex processes. Make's pricing is more competitive with lower setup costs, providing better ROI for cost-effective solutions with faster time-to-value.

To learn more, read our detailed Control-M vs. Make Report (Updated: July 2025).

Download the complete report

Control-M vs. Make

July 2025

Helped 865,384 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

Control-M

Ranking in Process Automation

2nd

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

126

Ranking in other categories

Managed File Transfer (MFT) (3rd), Workload Automation (1st)

Make

Ranking in Process Automation

23rd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 4.6%, up from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Make is 0.9%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Process Automation

Featured Reviews

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

Yaniv Ivgi

Business Owner at Chatbot-sales

An affordable cloud solution for automation and data manipulation

Make has a single IP. We cannot use a single IP because of the security. There are a lot of crashes when you work manually. Also, they need to provide more models. When you have an error, Make should inform them with guidance before you make the mistake. There is a lot of data you can confuse.

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

"We can set up automated email notifications to the programmers or the whole team for a particular job. It helps save time because we're not consistently looking at the job to see if it has ended or failed."

"Control-M has improved our organization's functions by supporting high availability and integrating with CI/CD workflows."

"We have a team called pro-mon and they monitor all the jobs for us. A single view for them makes it easy for them to monitor things."

"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 helps us meet our service-level agreements. It is integrated into our CI/CD pipeline. It enhances our operational productivity."

"Its compatibility with the new technologies and platforms, like the Google Cloud or Amazon, is the most valuable. Its console allows us to view the duration and execution of a process. It is also very easy to use and easy to implement."

"Control-M has helped us resolve issues 70% to 80% faster. It provides us with alerts instead of having someone go to that particular server and check the logs to determine where the issue is. We can simply click on the alert information, then everything is in front of us. This provides us with time savings, human effort savings, and process savings."

"Our ability to integrate with many different solutions has been invaluable. The new approach of the automation API and jobs-as-code is also valuable."

More Control-M pros

"The most valuable features of Make are the additional options when compared to other similar solutions. For example, with Google my business, you can only do certain things with Zapier, whereas with Make, you can do a little bit more."

"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."

"Make saves a lot of time, and I have created really complex scenarios in Make."

"Make's front-end interface, the modular interface that it has, drag-and-drop interface, is very easy to understand, use, and integrate."

Cons

"The UI can be challenging for new users due to its learning curve."

"Control-M could be improved on the reporting side. There can be better reporting on tasks and better dashboard capabilities for activities being completed. At the moment, it's a bit cumbersome if you receive an error message. There isn't a central place where you can view all of that."

"The high availability that comes from BMC with its supplied Postgres database is very limited. Even using your customer-supplied Postgres database is problematic. We have engaged with them regarding this, but it is difficult. My company doesn't want to do this and BMC doesn't want to do that. We just need to find some middle ground to get the proper high availability. We're also moving away, like the rest of the world, from the more expensive offerings, like Oracle. We are trying to use Postgres, which is free. The stability is good. It is just that the high availability configuration is not ideal. It could be better."

"Everybody's biggest gripe is the reporting capability option. It is a gripe because there is a lot of information in Control-M, but the solution doesn't have a good reporting tool to extract that information. Now, if you want all that information, you need to rely on another third-party BI tool to extract the information out of Control-M."

"Control-M could benefit from incorporating AI features for better job scheduling."

"The on-premise setup of Control-M is not that scalable. As our demands increase, it is almost reaching its bottleneck."

"The community and the networking that goes on within that community need improvement. We want to be able to reach out to an SME, and say, "Hey, we are doing it this way. Does that make sense?" Ideally, they come back. and say, "Yes, it does make sense to do it that way. However, if you want to do it this way, then it is a little more efficient." We understand that one solution framework doesn't fit everybody. Depending on the breadth of the data and how broad it is, you may have different models for one over the other."

"You need to pay for extra features if you need them."

More Control-M cons

"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."

"Make can be a bit difficult to use for new users, but for someone with technical knowledge and some coding skills, it becomes manageable, especially with Make's great UI features that really help."

"Make could improve the ease of use, it can be more complicated than other solutions. There are a lot of elements that are more technical than in other solutions."

"The pricing of Make at this point is through operations consumption, and it becomes really expensive in certain scenarios when iterations are involved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manually operations."

"Its pricing is a little bit high. They could provide an enterprise-level license for an unlimited number of jobs. Currently, it is based on the number of jobs, and if you exceed the number of jobs, there are charges. For example, if your license is for 3,000 jobs per day, but you run 3,050 jobs, you will have to pay for the extra 50 jobs. They charge $120 per job. So, it is too costly."

"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 solution is not cheap, it comes with quite a hefty price tag. Control-M is the market leader, but we still want the price to be as friendly as possible."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

"The price of Make is approximately $20 per month for the platform."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

26%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

No data available

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

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 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?

Its cost can be more competitive. One of the main things customers look at is the cost. It's not affordable. The cost is very high, according to my customers. The licensing cost is very high, and t...

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Make?

I find the pricing, setup costs, and licensing costs of Make to be reasonable.

What needs improvement with Make?

Make needs to put some focus on or clarify the security aspect in its documentation or website. When creating automation through these modules between two different applications, there should be cl...

What is your primary use case for Make?

Some of the very simple use cases that people use Make for is AI-powered content creation. That is where we help them out with different kinds of content creation and social media posting, differen...

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Comparisons

Compared 13% of the time

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

More Control-M Competitors

Camunda vs Make

Compared 47% of the time

Appian vs Make

Compared 25% of the time

Tray.io vs Make

Compared 16% of the time

Temporal vs Make

Compared 11% of the time

More Make Competitors

Product Reports

Download Control-M product report

Control-M

August 2025

Download Make product report

Process Automation

July 2025

Also Known As

Control M

Integromat

Interactive Demo

BMC

Demo not available

Overview

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

Visualize everything you do

Make lets you visually build workflows to solve complex problems - the way you imagine them in your mind.

Drag and drop to connect apps
Use the playful drag-and-drop builder to connect apps in a few clicks, and build workflows called scenarios.

Design infinite workflows
Build scenarios with as many steps or apps as you need.

Watch data flow in real time
Build your scenario and watch it run in real time. Schedule your scenario to run instantly or whenever you need it.

Sample Customers

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

Buan Consulting, Armadia