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

Control-M vs Rocket Zeke comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

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 Workload Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
121
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th)
Rocket Zeke
Ranking in Workload Automation
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 21.8%, down from 26.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zeke is 1.2%, down from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Pedro Fuentes - PeerSpot reviewer
Cost-effective, excellent support, and centralized access and control
They have a department that handles requests for enhancements. I talked to Control-M guys back in October or November when they had a gathering here in Atlanta. We talked about not being able to go back in history in Helix Control-M for more than two weeks. We submitted a request for enhancement. They told us that they are working on it, and they are thinking of expanding that to 30 days. We would like to see it expand to 90 days, but they are working on it. In Control-M, we were able to go back 180 days, but that was on-prem. The storage of that data was on our own servers. We know that storage is money, and we do not expect them to store that much of the data, but at least 30 to 60 days seem proper.
Daniele Folatelli - PeerSpot reviewer
It's a reliable solution that gets a lot done quickly
I work a lot with the support side when there are issues. I see a lot of confusion about the various licenses. The licensing model is somewhat complicated. The product license has to be installed. Sometimes, when a license is expiring and I need a new one, it's hard to understand where those licenses are in the guest support portal. I've discussed this with ASG, and they've acknowledged that it's too complicated. It has had an impact. It's not that the product doesn't work, but we get messages from the user worried that the product will run out of support and their whole operation will be affected.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Control-M is infinitely scalable. We only need to add agents. BMC will take care of it if you need anything on the SaaS side, but we can handle the rest using our agent architecture."
"Most valuable feature would be the ability to detect and notify when a process has not completed successfully."
"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."
"We are now able to deliver data to our data warehouses and dashboards promptly."
"Automation of the batch jobs is the most valuable feature."
"The reporting is top-notch. I haven't found any other applications on the market that can replicate what Control-M offers. The alerting is very good, and I think their service monitoring is the best in the industry."
"It gives us the ability to have end-to-end workflows, no matter where they're running."
"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."
"Two features are valuable. One is Rocket Zeke's ability to integrate with the mainframe, which is the main processor using the agent. It works on any computer, so users don't have to wait. They can use their laptop or any other way to connect and securely access all the necessary information. The other valuable feature is automation, which is an integral part of batch processing."
 

Cons

"Consider adding a mobile application for remote management."
"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."
"A lot of businesses are using ServiceNow, which is another tool. I would like there to be some integration with ServiceNow or other third-party tools as well as have easily available integrations. Right now, we need to write scripts. Apart from that, if there were some integrations with an ITSM tool, then that would be good. Because at the end of the day, most of our clients are using different ITSM tools. I know that BMC Remedy is easy to integrate with Control-M. However, if there was availability for Jira as well as other ITSM and DevOps tools, that would be a good improvement."
"We would recommend modernizing the look and feel of Control-M. They also need to move towards more self-service and development in their environment. It's very antiquated."
"There is definitely room for improvement. Version 9.0.20 actually comes with a web-based interface, but there are still a lot of things unavailable with it. There will eventually be more inclusions added into the web interface, but there is still a long way to go."
"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."
"I would like not to have to reach out to a third-party application company to do automated notifications. Right now, we still have people manually calling people and emailing people. There's a company called xMatters - and there are others - that has an API through Control-M that can automate any aspect of failure management. I'd like to see it build right into the product. I'd like to see a better notification product."
"The stability could be improved. I ran into an issue with a recent Control-M patch. The environment would become unstable if security ports were scanned. This is an area they need to improve on, but ultimately it's a relatively small improvement."
"I work a lot with the support side when there are issues. I see a lot of confusion about the various licenses. The licensing model is somewhat complicated. The product license has to be installed. Sometimes, when a license is expiring and I need a new one, it's hard to understand where those licenses are in the guest support portal. I've discussed this with Rocket Zeke, and they've acknowledged that it's too complicated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing is reasonable. It's not an exorbitant amount. The licensing is pretty reasonable for the number of jobs that we run."
"The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."
"BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."
"It is not bad. The company can afford it, and it pays for itself. We have those jobs running automatically."
"Licensing costs are around $3000 a year."
"This is now from my previous years as support for banks and big companies. If it's not enterprise scale, I find that it's too expensive for smaller companies. You really have to be quite big and need to have a dedicated support staff to run it, then you'll be fine. What we've seen at smaller companies, it's too expensive because they want to automate everything. Now, stuff that can literally run once a day for the rest of their lives is costing them $3 a job a day. It becomes too expensive, eventually. They are not seeing the return on investment because it's not business critical. Nobody is going to die or they're going to lose money if that job didn't run exactly at 11 minutes past 4:00. It's definitely for bigger enterprise companies, especially banks or healthcare providers. We have had an instance where Control-M was unavailable due to external factors for 20 minutes and there was a loss of almost a million euros because the solution involved logistics."
"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."
"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."
"I don't make purchasing decisions, but the decision-makers tell me they don't switch to other solutions because this one has the price they need. Pricing is part of their decision to stick with this product."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Insurance Company
18%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Control M
ASG Zeke
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Reliance, Raley's, Oney, Primerica, Postbank
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.