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

Control-M vs Pipefy 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
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (3rd)
Pipefy
Ranking in Process Automation
29th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
4.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Agentic Automation (11th), AI Agent Builders (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 3.3%, down from 4.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Pipefy is 0.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Control-M3.3%
Pipefy0.4%
Other96.3%
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.
Andre Soares - PeerSpot reviewer
Sre at Atlas Technologies
Workflow automation has improved cross‑team collaboration and centralizes operational requests
Overall, I had a positive experience with Pipefy, but I think there are still some areas that could be improved. One area would be advanced workflow management and scalability for more complex enterprise environments. As workflows grow larger and involve many teams, pipelines and automations can become difficult to maintain and organize over time. I also think reports and analytics could be more flexible and customizable for operational and management level insights. More advanced dashboard capabilities would be helpful for larger organizations. Another improvement could be deeper native integrations with technical and DevOps-oriented tools, especially for infrastructure and engineering workflows. In some cases, more advanced automation logic or conditional workflows require additional configurations or effort. Simplifying this experience could improve usability. Finally, while the platform is very useful and user-friendly for non-technical users, governance and permission management in larger environments could become easier to structure and manage at scale.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The File Transfer component is quite valuable. The integration with products such as Informatica and SAP are very valuable to us as well. Rather than having to build our own interface into those products, we can use the ones that come out of the box. The integration with databases is valuable as well. We use database jobs quite a bit."
"Scheduling has changed from basic to more complex as our developers get acquainted with the ability and flexibility of the product."
"Control-M has improved our visibility and streamlining, giving us better clarity into data flows so we can resolve issues faster and provide audit answers quickly and with confidence instead of reverse engineering convoluted pipelines."
"IBM Workload Scheduler and Control-M are far superior to any of the other products on the market."
"The reporting and the analytics that I can generate out of my schedules are valuable."
"The ability to integrate file transfers has been instrumental in allowing us to accomplish the things we need with Control-M. In our industry, we take a lot of data and either push it down to the stores or retail grocery stores. We take files and push them down to the stores or pull files and information from the stores and bring it back to corporate. So, it's two-way communication with file transfers. One of the bigger things that we do with Control-M is scheduling data moves and moving data from one location to another."
"The unified view where you can define, orchestrate, and monitor applications, workflows, and data pipelines is important because we have more than one team working on Control-M. We have a support team, a job-creation team, and a SAP team. We can all work together on it. It avoids anyone from working on his part and not using the latest modifications."
"This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manual operations."
"Pipefy has had a positive impact on my organization by helping the collections team convert invoices that were overdue into paid invoices and, consequently, cash for the company."
"Overall, Pipefy helped create more predictable, organized, and scalable operational processes."
"Pipefy has impacted my organization positively as we have not reduced our headcount, but we could if we wanted to because the number of people managing those processes before Pipefy was a lot."
"In terms of money and time saved, Pipefy is a great time saver overall, reflecting in analysts handling additional projects beyond ticket management."
 

Cons

"The GUI needs to be improved, they cannot provide a good GUI."
"Scalability. Yes, it is not currently suited well for the Cloud."
"Though the tool is very resource intensive and has a few levels of performance issues when compared with VM and physical servers."
"Technical support is 7/10. I contacted tech support on a weekend, because I had to run a weekly batch, and I did not see much of an immediate response from them, but they were able to sort out the issue a little later."
"One area for improvement in Control-M could be in the logs, as they only show when the job started and whether it ended successfully or not."
"The licensing is quite expensive."
"Personally, I'd like to see a little bit more color in the web interface, and in terms of its technical ability, the one thing I would be critical about is a bit more user-friendliness with the reports and the way we input information into it."
"There should be an expansion in storing more data as it currently provides data storage for only up to 60 days."
"Overall, I had a positive experience with Pipefy, but I think there are still some areas that could be improved."
"What is lacking is direct support, since I am required to go through a third-party outsourcing company to connect with Pipefy."
"I believe Pipefy can be improved by clarifying the API calls and making packages for API calls more accessible, because in my organization we have a lot of automation, but we have few API calls, precisely because we have a fixed plan and the organization, in fact, does not need that."
"Pipefy can be improved with processes not only following Kanban styles but other kinds of processes that have more paths, not just a single, direct path, but they have bifurcations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its pricing and licensing could be a little bit better. Based on my experience and discussions with other existing customers, everybody feels that the regular Managed File Transfer piece, not the enterprise one, is a little overpriced, especially for folks who already have licensed Advanced File Transfer. We understand that Advanced File Transfer is going away and is going to be the end of life, and there is some additional functionality built into MFT, but the additional functionality does not really correlate with the huge price increase over what we're paying for AFT already. This has actually driven a lot of people to look for alternative solutions."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"In our environment, pricing depends on the total number of maximum jobs that can run, which is fine. Therefore, if the number of jobs increases, then the licensing fees will increase."
"The annual licensing within BMC Control-M is on a per task basis. Three- and five-year contracts are also offered. The customer usually buys a bundle of tasks, e.g., 5,000 tasks, then my team configures Control-M for their usage."
"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."
"We have a license till 2024. We are good and satisfied with it."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Retailer
6%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business41
Midsize Enterprise27
Large Enterprise167
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 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 needs improvement with Control-M?
We are not on the latest version of Control-M; we currently have version 20 and 21.
What needs improvement with Pipefy?
I believe Pipefy can be improved by clarifying the API calls and making packages for API calls more accessible, because in my organization we have a lot of automation, but we have few API calls, pr...
What is your primary use case for Pipefy?
My main use case for Pipefy involves creating accounts receivable pipes, splitting tasks among the operations team, and managing projects. I duplicate the information from the financial system for ...
What advice do you have for others considering Pipefy?
My advice for others thinking about using Pipefy is to have defined processes, so that the migration is easier before migrating. I think Pipefy is a good tool for those who already know what they w...
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

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

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
1. Accenture 2. Coca-Cola 3. Santander 4. IBM 5. Unilever 6. Siemens 7. Johnson & Johnson 8. Deloitte 9. PwC 10. Nestle 11. General Electric 12. Microsoft 13. Oracle 14. Amazon 15. Facebook 16. Google 17. Apple 18. Uber 19. Airbnb 20. Netflix 21. Adobe 22. Salesforce 23. Cisco 24. Intel 25. HP 26. Samsung 27. Sony 28. Toyota 29. Volkswagen 30. BMW 31. Mercedes-Benz 32. Audi
Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. Pipefy and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,988 professionals have used our research since 2012.