We performed a comparison between Camunda and Control-M based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Camunda Platform is its Microservices architecture, which is easily integrable with APIs."
"We have a lot of users, almost 1,800, and we needed something affordable, stable and something that could be used by a large financial company. This solution truly fit the bill."
"It is very user-friendly compared to IBM BPM. It's much simpler – it's more streamlined. That means even non-technical departments can use it."
"I've found the active community most valuable but it also provides you with a lot of other features."
"The most valuable feature is that, with a visual system, you can try to have a process client before beginning the programming for the application."
"It is open-source. It supports microservice orchestration. This is what we are really interested in. We can customize our products depending on the use cases."
"The solution is useful for small projects."
"We have the ability to modify the product if we need to, and that comes in handy whenever we need to add new functionality and features."
"Control-M has helped us resolve issues 70% to 80% faster. It provides us with alerts instead of having someone go to that particular server and check the logs to determine where the issue is. We can simply click on the alert information, then everything is in front of us. This provides us with time savings, human effort savings, and process savings."
"It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic."
"Because it's a tool which allows us to do scheduled work, it allows for notifications when jobs aren't running within that scheduled time frame. This improves the opportunity to meet SLAs."
"There is a batch monitoring tool called Batch Impact Manager, which proactively warns when processing is behind and SLAs are in jeopardy of being missed."
"The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced."
"It is simple to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines and to ingest data from different platforms. It integrates well between platforms."
"I find it very helpful to be able to keep track of all our help desk tickets."
"In our bank, all new applications need to be implemented with Control-M. We try to look for the best way to establish communication between both products. One of the new features for us is Application Integrator. It is a very interesting feature because it lets us integrate with those applications that are not included in Control-M. By using Application Integrator, we can easily integrate new technologies. With the help of Application Integrator, we recently integrated with Blue Prism, which is a robotic product. We could integrate such processes into Control-M. Now, we are working with Ansible, and we are putting Ansible automated processes into Control-M."
"We're trying to put the people from the business to do it. We are using APIs, and we have open APIs to define our APIs and the request-response that each call requires and sends. So, to base the mapping on that, there was nothing to help. I know that with some tools, such as Oracle tools, you can see the input and expected output. With drag and drop, you can take one property from the left and drag it to the right, and it does all the mapping itself, but that's not the case with Camunda. So, for me, this is something that can be improved."
"The user interface needs improvement. It should be more tailored to the end-user and offer a better user experience design over the user interface itself."
"It would be better if the tool were made less reliant on Java."
"The initial setup can be complex for business users."
"Lacking in forms visualization."
"The product's initial setup phase is difficult for beginners."
"The only drawback is the time that it takes to have a complete set of workflows implemented on the Camunda platform."
"It would be helpful to have more readily available use cases on the internet. Camunda's documentation feels less comprehensive."
"I've never been very successful when researching ways to utilize Batch Impact Manager. It's a tool to set up dummy jobs in your job flow and it's supposed to come back to you and say, 'Okay, for this job flow, you are 50 percent complete at a certain point in time'...I would like things like Batch Impact Manager to be a little more user-friendly, out-of-the-box."
"Integration with some applications and platforms is complex and requires development. We have done some integration with the application integrator, but it was more like a manual solution. This is an area that can be improved."
"The company has been working with BMC on the MFT. There are still some things about MFT which don't work the way that we want with our needs. So, we would like to see that improved."
"A Control-M on-prem license is based on the number of jobs, which is the number of tasks a particular customer wants to have. These tasks have to be run within 24 hours window. For example, if you have a license for 100 jobs, you can run a maximum of 100 jobs in a 24-hour window. If your operations could not run 10 jobs, and they ran only 90 jobs, they just carry over to the next day, but the next day, they will have 110 jobs. Control-M asks you to buy those 10 more licenses because you were out of compliance in terms of the number of licenses. This is something that needs to be indicated in Control-M GUI so that customers know the number of licenses they're going to use in this time window. Their support and documentation should be improved. I am not that satisfied with their customer support. Sometimes, they don't have the answers. Their documentation is very poor. It is not well written, and it is not in a very logical manner. You can use it on Unix, Linux, Windows, and AIX, but it needs some improvement on iSeries. It needs a built-in mechanism inside the system to give you an option to restore from the last point of failure. If a process crashes, the Control-M needs to have a mechanism in iSeries where the process can be restored from the last point of failure."
"We've also had a few database bugs within our organization. I think we are migrating to OpenJDK rather than just regular Java and that has since shown some issues with our Control-M instance, timing out and causing our jobs to stop running. We are still working with BMC to fine-tune that and get that resolved."
"I would like to see automatic license management. And probably more importantly, some kind of machine learning to help identify the optimum automation path."
"When it comes to supporting cloud services, Control-M is a bit slow. We are not advancing with the technology because we don't have the modules that can interact or use the new application services provided by the cloud technologies."
"Sometimes, with technical support, they will take feedback, but you don't know where that feedback goes or if it proceeds along in the thought process."
Camunda is ranked 1st in Process Automation with 71 reviews while Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews. Camunda is rated 8.2, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Camunda writes "Open-source, easy to define new processes, and easy to transition to new business process definitions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". Camunda is most compared with Apache Airflow, Bizagi, Pega BPM, IBM BPM and Appian, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, Automic Workload Automation and ServiceNow Orchestration. See our Camunda vs. Control-M report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process 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.
