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

Endevor vs Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Endevor
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Mainframe Application Development (2nd)
Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of Endevor is 25.8%, down from 33.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) is 7.9%, up from 7.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Configuration Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Endevor25.8%
Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)7.9%
Other66.3%
Software Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

Efrén Yanez - PeerSpot reviewer
Good analysis and integrations with helpful automation
If I had to comment on an area of ​​improvement or something new in the next or future version, I would like to see AI-assisted coding and impact analysis for mainframes. It is actually a fairly complete product. It is robust with a solid history and is always growing in functionality. It has a high level of maturity, which benefits the users and the administrators. This tool, with its group of options, facilitates the integration with other business processes, which allows you to take advantage of other solutions by incorporating automatic functions.
reviewer1527093 - PeerSpot reviewer
Very flexible with Johnny-on-the-spot tech support
I would like to see them enable parallel development for online. It's available now for batch stuff on the mainframe. Jenkins, IBM, and Rocket all supposedly already have safe and workable version of Git for the mainframe. With that in mind, we need to know where our feature is. Unfortunately, as good as ChangeMan is, if we're listing downfalls, they should be talking to me about this. Not me having to go talk to them about it. Hopefully, they have this in the works and they are positioning their product for the future. That's just a straightforward comment. It really comes down to whether they are complacent or not. The other thing that should improve is cost. Git, even on the mainframe, a large part of the components "free". They're the way you set them up yourselves and they're self-sustaining and built into the infrastructure. You can't charge me for that. I gave ChangeMan an overall score of eight, but what could drive them to a nine is coming up with a way for all my code that belongs together to be tracked and moved together. Everything should move based upon the mainframe; it needs to be alerted and synchronized.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The source management is excellent."
"We have been able to replicate entire SDLCs for new clients and have them loaded and ready to use Endevor in as little as one week. This was possible with the use of Endevor variables within the processors, so that a single processor was able to function for multiple systems across the entire SDLC."
"It can be very flexible, as far as how you use it. You can make it do nearly anything, but in really clever ways. It is very versatile."
"The approach of writing a single set of Endevor processors to work across multiple instances of the application (separate systems) made the processors fairly complex, but once you understand them, they are so powerful."
"It's very flexible. A new technology comes along, this can be multiplied to handle the new technology quite easily."
"Having something that is out-of-the-box that you can customize to suit your organization's needs is huge."
"It offers security and audit of changes in information assets (software)."
"Endevor is easy to use."
"We audit once a year for our ChangeMan access, accurate financial programs, and all of that. Auditors really love ChangeMan for how easy it is to get through and how tight the security is on it. Our internal auditors, external auditors, and SOX editors love this solution. We're in the healthcare business, so HIPAA regulations and all such things are a big deal, and this makes all that really simple."
"Scalability is great. It has absolutely met every need for us so far. We do have some concurrent development paths and we're able to flexibly assign variables. At the same time, our skeletons assemble where we want them to, so the scalability is very good."
 

Cons

"The scalability of Endevor could improve."
"Learning the tool for the first time was extremely difficult, and it could be because of all the other processes we had around it. But knowing you can do these things in batch, you can do things in the foreground or online mode, and then these, you have to have a package for. There are these rules, and some of the concepts inside the tool are not clear, like what is the CCID? Why do I have to have one? What is that? And how is it used? As a developer, it's not important to me - I don't know what a CCID is, and I don't care - but apparently it's important to someone."
"There should be better integration between CA Endevor Software Change Manager and Zowe."
"One feature of Endevor is its Backout feature. If there is a problem, it can back out the executables. The only problem with that is that it will not back out the source in Endevor. For example, you can do a back out and it will back out the executable to the previous version, but it doesn't back out the source version in Endevor. It would make it much better if when you did a back out of Endevor, it would back out both the source and the executable and keep them in sync."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."
"The customer service and support team are not helpful."
"There are a lot of screens in it. The process for moving out my other solutions, it could be more convenient. There are a lot of steps to go through and a lot of screens to go through to get it accomplished."
"I would like to see them enable parallel development for online. It's available now for batch stuff on the mainframe. Jenkins, IBM, and Rocket all supposedly already have safe and workable version of Git for the mainframe. With that in mind, we need to know where our feature is."
"As such, there's nothing wrong with the product. It is great, but there are small things that can be better to make it much more friendly. The way you navigate through fields can be improved. If I'm going to stage a component over something that exists and that I've created in another library, and I want to pull it in and write it over what I've got there in my package, I've got to type in that data set name every time. That can be aggravating. It is not a big deal. The way things are sorted can also be improved. If you're doing a delete of a bunch of components, you can't sort those out by type or anything. Some things are just standard, and you can't look at them in a way that would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is expensive."
"The solution is very expensive."
"It's competitively priced and, as far as I know, it's just an enterprise license. We have found it is worth the money."
"Licensing is fairly simple, you don't need multiple licenses."
"It's worth the value. The pricing is fairly good, justifiable for the return on investment."
"Just make sure if you are going to license, ensure you license the right features.​"
"It's on a yearly basis. I am not aware of any additional costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
870,697 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
32%
Insurance Company
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Insurance Company
13%
Computer Software Company
7%
Outsourcing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise39
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Endevor?
The product’s implementation process is complicated and restrictive. It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up, at lea...
What is your primary use case for Endevor?
We use the product as a source manager and program manager. It helps in controlling the mainframe code and performing data migrations.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

CA Endevor Software Change Manager, Endevor Software Change Manager, CA Software Change Manager for Mainframe, CA Endevor SCM
Open Text, Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Blue Hill Data Services Inc.
SPTS Technologies, Generali France, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (BBH), Kutxa-Vital-Banco Madrid, Space and Naval Warfare Information Technology Center (SPAWAR ITC)
Find out what your peers are saying about Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
870,697 professionals have used our research since 2012.