Control-M and webMethods.io are prominent in workload automation and integration solutions. Based on a feature-rich evaluation, Control-M outperforms in environments requiring robust batch processing, particularly with AS400, whereas webMethods.io is more proficient in offering a comprehensive integration platform for business processes.
Features: Control-M is known for its extensive integrations and cross-platform management, particularly excelling in environments like AS400. It boasts advanced batch scheduling and supports various platforms through Control Modules. webMethods.io offers an intuitive interface with strong application and process integration capabilities, supporting a wide range of integrations such as B2B communications and APIs.
Room for Improvement: Control-M could enhance its reporting tools and provide more flexibility in output analysis. Users have also expressed a need for improved cost management. webMethods.io users seek better documentation, enhanced API management, and cost reduction for additional components.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both platforms offer flexible deployment options suitable for hybrid and on-premises setups. Control-M is scalable but complex for smaller environments, with technical support that may lag during complex issues. webMethods.io is praised for cloud support but receives mixed reviews on customer service responsiveness.
Pricing and ROI: Control-M is seen as expensive, with costs rising with the number of jobs; however, users acknowledge long-term ROI with operational efficiency. webMethods.io offers flexible enterprise-focused pricing, yet its licensing structure is complex. Users value its comprehensive feature set in integrations, appreciating the perceived value over time.
The main return on investment with Helix Control-M has been a reduction in downtime and minimization of manual interventions, which has improved our operational efficiency.
You can run a million batch jobs or tasks at night when all of your highly skilled people are at home sleeping.
By implementing automation tools, you can minimize human errors and improve efficiency.
They quickly evolve with changing technology trends, easily adopt new features, and incorporate them into the product.
The technical support is very polite, helpful, and available 24/7.
If something fails at 3 AM in the morning, you need to fix it and get it back up and working really quickly.
It can absorb more workload wherever needed.
As the workload on Control-M increases, its scalability is much higher.
I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability.
Whenever more resources are needed, they become available automatically without any human interference.
Vertically, scalability is fine, however, I have not expanded horizontally with the product yet.
The downtime is higher compared to AWS.
The testing and development phases need to be more rigorous before releasing patches.
Once properly implemented, the system becomes very stable, which is one of its strongest attributes.
There are some issues like the tool hanging or the need for additional jars when exposing web services.
We provide support to our clients, and the minimum calls I receive are for webMethods.io; it's very stable.
They could provide more documentation and tutorials to make the initial setup easier to understand.
There should be an automation system for developers to set it up more easily and quickly.
What they've done about scheduling, other people are still trying to figure out.
webMethods.io lacks advanced monitoring and analytics capabilities, so my customers need to use something additional.
A special discount of at least 50% for old customers would allow us to expand our services and request more resources.
The licensing cost is very high, and they often consider switching to IBM Workload Scheduler or other options.
Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more.
The best cell phone will always be more expensive.
Regarding the pricing and licensing of webMethods.io, I don't think it's expensive when compared with the features.
Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.
The user interface is comprehensive and lets me view all my jobs on one page, monitor everything, and access the job history.
It is easy to integrate Control-M with technologies for data ops or DevOps processes as things change, and it is not complex compared to other workload automation tools available in the market.
It facilitates the exposure of around 235 services through our platform to feed various government entities across the entire country.
I believe data transformation is exceptional in webMethods.io because they have an online database that can cache the database online.
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?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.
webMethods.io Integration is a powerful integration platform as a service (iPaaS) that provides a combination of capabilities offered by ESBs, data integration systems, API management tools, and B2B gateways.
We monitor all Managed File Transfer (MFT) 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.
