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

Control-M vs Microsoft System Center Orchestrator 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

Control-M
Ranking in Process Automation
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
183
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (1st)
Microsoft System Center Orc...
Ranking in Process Automation
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 3.7%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft System Center Orchestrator is 1.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Control-M3.7%
Microsoft System Center Orchestrator1.3%
Other95.0%
Process Automation
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Dan Campeanu - PeerSpot reviewer
Security Engineer at ProVision
Automates tasks and manages multiple servers from a central location
The initial setup was quite complex. It required careful preparation of installation steps, as many tasks were not automated as expected. Special attention was needed to prepare groups, users, and permissions at each step to ensure a smooth setup process. Please do so accurately to avoid having to start over. Challenges encountered during deployment included issues with installation and configuration and difficulties detecting machines and executing tasks as expected. Some solutions were found through trial and error during installation, while others were discovered through recommendations from other users. Despite these challenges, the deployment and rollout of Orchestrator took approximately one and a half months to ensure proper functionality.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I can say around twenty to twenty-five percent productivity increase has been realized, and even the margins have been increased, and I can see at least fifteen to twenty percent of the company's revenue has been increased at the infrastructure level by using Control-M."
"Its stability and the feature list are rich compared to other tools in the market."
"Control-M processes about 10,000 jobs starting every day in our production environment, and adding new jobs is very simple."
"The flexibility of Helix Control-M allows us to manage tasks efficiently. The user interface is comprehensive and lets me view all my jobs on one page, monitor everything, and access the job history."
"The graphical visibility of processes is clearer than other job scheduling solutions, which is Control-M's biggest selling point."
"The File Watcher utility, cyclic jobs, and email alert notification are valuable."
"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."
"Control-M has improved application reliability and the SLAs in our company by quite a bit. You can see if problems are coming. If we have an SLA in a couple of hours, we know well before that couple hours if processing is behind, and it allows us to take some preventative action."
"Automation is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"It can manage multiple servers and workstations from a single location."
 

Cons

"The MFT applications should have more functionality and flexibility within that tool. Having more flexibility with that tool for handling the one to many or many to one concept. Like being able to take data from one source and push it to many locations or pull data from many locations and bring it back into a single source. That's why we still use our TPS program for the file transfers just because we don't have some of those capabilities available to us within MFT."
"The UI can be challenging for new users due to its learning curve. Additionally, there are some errors during automation. More detailed logs would be helpful."
"Regarding product design and R&D, the DevOps pipeline could be improved with better capabilities and automation. API security and authentication is another area that could use improvement; users must have static credential passwords, which is a security concern."
"Some of the features are not available. We were about to deploy the REST API, but we had some challenges. We had to use a third-party application. So, it should be improved in terms of integrating REST API jobs. That was something that was lacking. The customer was not that happy in terms of getting the desired output. So, we had to use a third-party application called Hangfire. We would like to have more videos on REST API integration, and we would like to have easy integration with the Control-M application through the REST API."
"Advanced File Transfer (AFT) has limitations that cause us to use a bit more licensing than we feel is appropriate."
"Whenever I pull an S4HANA job to the Helix Control-M tool, it pulls it naturally with all the steps. A job can have several steps, and in this case, it is very easy to control the steps taken. However, in the case of the SaaS IBP tool, it can pull the job but cannot identify the steps. So, when I want to take an action in a step, I have to split the job."
"From a support perspective, BMC technical support needs improvements."
"It is a very strong product, but the reporting could be better."
"I find the Orchestrator UI to be problematic."
"The product's management aspect needs enhancement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"BMC does NOT have a great licensing model from my perspective."
"There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."
"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."
"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."
"For the tooling that you get, the licensing is acceptable. It has competitive pricing, especially with all the value that you get out of it. There are additional costs with some of the additional modules, but they are all electives. Out of the box, you get the standard Control-M experience and the standard license. They're not forcing some of the modules on you. If you decide that you do need them, you can always purchase those separately."
"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."
"Pricing can be steep, but you get what you pay for."
"We have a license till 2024. We are good and satisfied with it."
"I give the cost of the solution a five out of ten."
"We obtained a license that bundled Windows Server with System Center at no additional cost."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Insurance Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise140
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?
From what I know about pricing, I would probably put Control-M in the expensive category, but you do pay for what you get; you are paying for a premium product.
What do you like most about Microsoft System Center Orchestrator?
It can manage multiple servers and workstations from a single location.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft System Center Orchestrator?
The platform was almost free of cost for us. We obtained a license that bundled Windows Server with System Center at no additional cost.
What needs improvement with Microsoft System Center Orchestrator?
The product's management aspect needs enhancement. It affects the visibility of powerful scripts that were previously accessible. Furthermore, the focus is shifting towards cloud-based features, sp...
 

Also Known As

Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM
MS System Center Orchestrator
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. Microsoft System Center Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.