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

Broadcom and Rocket Software are both solutions in the Software Configuration Management category. Broadcom is ranked #1 with an average rating of 7.5, while Rocket Software is ranked #6. Broadcom holds a 33.1% mindshare in SCM, compared to Rocket Software’s 8.6% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of Broadcom users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Rocket Software users who would recommend it.

Endevor

Read 45 Endevor reviews

1,737 Views
1,668 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...

Read 3 Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) reviews

407 Views
407 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Endevor

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Endevor and Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Software Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

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

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 861,390 peers since 2012

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

1st

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Mainframe Application Development (3rd)

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...

Ranking in Software Configuration Management

6th

Average Rating

7.6

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of Endevor is 33.1%, up from 33.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) is 8.6%, up from 6.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Configuration Management

Featured Reviews

Efrén Yanez

Security Manager & CM Specialist & Mainframe Specialist en eSoft at eSoft 2006

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.

Read full review

reviewer1527093

Development Team Lead at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"In the last year or so, we had a need to start using a CICS web services, and mesh them in with some distributed functions on an enterprise service bus. We put the web services into Endevor and we manage that way now."

"The most valuable feature of Endevor is customization and ease of use."

"The source management is excellent."

"Having something that is out-of-the-box that you can customize to suit your organization's needs is huge."

"Stability has been really good. I have actually never had to open an issue or report an issue since I have been running it."

"It puts all our source in one product. We know where to go to gather all our source code and which source is associated with which executable. It's a one-stop-shop, one place to go for everything."

"We can make it do pretty much whatever we want, depending on just how complicated we want it to be, as it is pretty flexible."

"The most valuable features are stability and ease of use."

More Endevor pros

"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."

"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."

Cons

"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."

"I would like to have better integration with other products."

"They need to ditch the Eclipse plugin and just make the development environment for Z the standard Eclipse interface."

"The main challenges are its limited interface and the complexity of the customization."

"The solution is very expensive."

"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."

"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 difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up."

More Endevor cons

"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

"Just make sure if you are going to license, ensure you license the right features."

"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."

"The product is 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."

"The solution is very expensive."

"It's on a yearly basis. I am not aware of any additional costs."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

35%

Insurance Company

12%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

26%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

10%

Real Estate/Law Firm

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Endevor?

Endevor is easy to use.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

BMC Compuware ISPW vs Endevor

Compared 71% of the time

IBM Engineering Workflow Management vs Endevor

Compared 7% of the time

CA Harvest Software Change Manager vs Endevor

Compared 6% of the time

IBM Rational ClearCase vs Endevor

Compared 3% of the time

More Endevor Competitors

BMC Compuware ISPW vs Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)

Compared 38% of the time

More Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Endevor

July 2025

Download Endevor product report

Buyer's Guide

Software Configuration Management

June 2025

Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) report

Download Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) product report

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

Endevor is a robust tool for managing source code, coordinating unit and system tests, controlling lifecycle and version of mainframe applications, and automating compilation processes. It ensures source-executable code integrity and tracks software promotions and sales operations.

Endevor offers stability, ease of use, and comprehensive management for mainframe code control and data migrations. Key features include customization capabilities, controlled access to source management, and integration within Enterprise DevOps. Tools like ACM Component Monitor, Bridge for Git, and modern web services support dynamic environments and parallel development efforts while custom JCLs/PROCs ensure validation of standard names. However, improvements are needed in integration with other products, particularly Zowe, and enhanced scalability and parallel development support.

What are Endevor's key features?

Customization: Tailored JCLs/PROCs for environment-specific needs
ACM Component Monitor: Monitors and manages application components efficiently
Bridge for Git: Facilitates integration with Git repositories
Enterprise DevOps Integration: Ensures seamless DevOps workflows
Parallel Development Support: Allows multiple development streams
Modern Web Services: Supports dynamic environments

What benefits should users look for in the reviews?

Stability: Reliable performance in managing mainframe applications
Ease of Use: User-friendly interface for efficient management
Comprehensive Management: End-to-end control of code and data migrations
Security: Ensures the integrity and security of source code
Controlled Access: Granular access control for source management

Organizations in sectors such as finance, healthcare, and retail rely on Endevor to streamline their mainframe application development. The tool aids in complying with strict regulatory requirements by providing audit and security functionalities. The complex setup and implementation process are offset by the significant efficiencies gained in a controlled and secure development environment.

Broadcom

Change management solutions that tackle the complexity of developing, deploying and maintaining software applications.

Rocket Software

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)

Buyer's Guide

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

July 2025

Free Report: Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)

Find out what your peers are saying about Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

861,390 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) report.

See our list of best Software Configuration Management vendors.

We monitor all Software Configuration Management 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.