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

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

Why PeerSpot?
 

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
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mainframe Application Development (3rd)
Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of Endevor is 12.1%, down from 23.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) is 10.0%, up from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Configuration Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Endevor12.1%
Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)10.0%
Other77.9%
Software Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

RobertMartin3 - PeerSpot reviewer
Production Supervisor Technical at Ontario Power Generation
Asset dashboards have created slow, rigid workflows and have limited effective life cycle tracking
The single dashboards do not help my team or the company as a whole. I feel the dashboards are not helpful because the search features are not customizable. The software is web-based and the server is extremely slow. To improve Endevor, its cloud or web-based server capabilities should be increased so that the software is faster. The ability to customize reports should be increased.
reviewer1527093 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

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."
"The integrity of the system is valuable, providing secure, controlled access to source management and the typical check-in and check-out functions in a typical source management product."
"The tools are specifically designed for mainframe environments, providing features tailored to the unique requirements of the systems, ensuring there are no mistakes."
"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."
"They've got plug-ins now to run it through Eclipse, they've got a lot of APIs, they handle UNIX files. I can't really think of any serious lack that they haven't addressed."
"It is easy to use, easy to learn, and easy to maintain; also the automation."
"What I like about Endevor personally is it can be very flexible, as far as how you use it, and you can make it do nearly anything, but in really clever ways."
"​Stability has been really good. I have actually never had to open an issue or report an issue since I have been running it.​"
"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."
"What’s most valuable to me is the ability to compile the code and move it through the test and productions environments."
"Auditors really love ChangeMan for how easy it is to get through and how tight the security is on it."
"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

"It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up."
"It's not a perfect solution."
"The scalability of Endevor could improve."
"There are a lot of areas: using it cross-platform; across a diverse set of application portfolios, including legacy systems, as well as open systems; both waterfall and Agile development."
"The customer service and support team are not helpful and they're slow to respond."
"While CA is able to react to our requests for new features, I think the downside is they don’t use as much long, or medium term strategy anymore."
"The solution is very expensive."
"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."
"Their technical support is not so good. To be perfectly honest, that's one of the reasons we were looking at other solutions."
"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."
"I would like to see a better search tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is very expensive."
"It's worth the value. The pricing is fairly good, justifiable for the return on investment."
"The product is expensive."
"Licensing is fairly simple, you don't need multiple licenses."
"Just make sure if you are going to license, ensure you license the right features.​"
"It's competitively priced and, as far as I know, it's just an enterprise license. We have found it is worth the money."
"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.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Insurance Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Insurance Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise40
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Endevor?
The single dashboards do not help my team or the company as a whole. I feel the dashboards are not helpful because the search features are not customizable. The software is web-based and the server...
What is your primary use case for Endevor?
My main use case for Endevor is asset management. For asset management, we use Engage software for life cycle management, eHealth, and eStrategy.
What advice do you have for others considering Endevor?
My advice to others looking into using Endevor is that if you are a nuclear electrical utility, the software is likely well-suited, but if you are any other utility, the software is poorly suited f...
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: November 2026.
920,939 professionals have used our research since 2012.