We performed a comparison between Mule Anypoint Platform and Rocket Zena based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Workload Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Overall, it is a pretty good product. It is also very scalable."
"MuleSoft Anypoint Platform's most valuable features are its observability and stability."
"We are very satisfied with the DevOps support."
"The tool's visual features are attractive."
"API management."
"The API toolkit is the solution's most valuable aspect at this time, for our organization."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is a huge list of available connectors for a lot of different platforms, which we can use very easily."
"The most valuable features of the Mule Anypoint Platform are the Flex Gateway, API management, easy-to-use, and connectors. Additionally, they are coming out with improvements to the solution when required."
"I have found the scheduling feature the most valuable. I can map dependencies by using ASG-Zena. It gives a nice, quick visualization as to where things are."
"From a Linux configuration point of view, Rocket Zena is straightforward. It's fairly easy to set up the server and agents once you know how to do it."
"In the latest upgrade, Zena added a web-based client. The more I use it, the more I like it. It's an excellent interface. They do a good job of steadily improving the solution to make it more useful."
"We haven't had any problems since we installed it. It runs as expected, we haven't had any critical problems. It helps keeps the business running 24/7."
"I have used other tools with similar capabilities; it's the ease of use."
"Its FTP feature is very good, as is scheduling any process or task with the Zena client. I have found it to be very helpful. If a task fails, it gives you a prompt."
"I like the whole product, but specifically, I like the license part. It's very easy to acquire a license for this product."
"The most valuable feature is the FTP file transfer."
"The solution's pricing model is very strange, and it will be really expensive if you use APIs a lot."
"We would like an entire DevOps in place in this particular solution."
"The pricing can be a little bit less."
"MuleSoft's release calendar is rather conventional with two major, two minor releases and hotfixes in between. The competition sometimes offer more rapid release cycles and provides improved and new functionality with a faster time-to-market."
"Mule Anypoint Platform could improve by having more up-to-date adapters to do work in a digital space."
"Code quality, Code Security, SaaS, and DaaS security, can all be improved."
"This becomes an expensive solution over time."
"Technical support needs to be improved, especially when you need help with more technical aspects of the solution."
"The documentation has room for improvement."
"The scheduling mapping is a little disjointed. There is no wizard-type approach. There are a lot of different things that you have to do in completely different areas. They could probably add the functionality for creating all components of a mapping or an OPA schedule. The component creation could be done collectively rather than through individual components."
"In the next release, I would like the user experience to be improved. The user interface should be more appealing to gen-z."
"Rocket Zena is a mainframe-based job scheduler. I would like it to be more open so that we can use it on a distributed platform."
"The UI is not intuitive, and it would be nice if there was a web interface."
"In the next release, I would like to have an alert feature to indicate when an agent is down. Rocket Zena is not capable of sending alerts that the agent is down. As of now, you have manually monitor to see when the agent is down."
"One area where it could be improved is communication between the different servers. Sometimes there are processes that have already been completed but we get a status notification that they're still active."
"Another one that is probably a little bit bigger for me is that when there is an issue or there's an error, it writes on a different screen. I have to find the actual process name and go to a different screen to view the alert that got generated. On that screen, everyone's processes, not just the processes of the folks in my department, are thrown. It takes me a while to find the actual error so that I could go in there and look at the alert. It could be because of the way it was set up, but at least for me, it isn't too intuitive."
Mule Anypoint Platform is ranked 8th in Workload Automation with 41 reviews while Rocket Zena is ranked 12th in Workload Automation with 9 reviews. Mule Anypoint Platform is rated 8.2, while Rocket Zena is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Mule Anypoint Platform writes "Robust, reliable, and stable, ensuring high availability for critical integrations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Rocket Zena writes "A continuously evolving, stable solution, with responsive support". Mule Anypoint Platform is most compared with MuleSoft Composer, Microsoft Azure Logic Apps, Oracle Integration Cloud Service, SAP Process Orchestration and SAP Cloud Platform, whereas Rocket Zena is most compared with Control-M, Rocket Zeke, IBM Workload Automation, AutoSys Workload Automation and ActiveBatch by Redwood. See our Mule Anypoint Platform vs. Rocket Zena report.
See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.
We monitor all Workload Automation 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.
