We performed a comparison between Control-M and Redwood Software - Workload Automation Edition based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Control-M offers valuable features such as Managed File Transfer, credentials vault, integration capabilities, Role-Based Administration, file transfer integration, collaboration dashboard, scheduling, web interface, reporting, workload archiving, and forecasting. Redwood Software provides powerful job definitions, job importation, user authority restrictions, monitoring alerts, dashboards, error handling, task scheduling, system integration, user-friendly interface, real-time event monitoring, cloud automation, load balancing, memory management, and mobile notifications.
Control-M could benefit from improvements in microservices, API integration, reporting capabilities, and customization options. Redwood Software would benefit from improvements in reporting features, monitoring and alert service, user interface, and security standards.
Service and Support: Control-M's customer service and support have received both positive and negative feedback. Some customers appreciate the support team's promptness and expertise, while others believe there is room for improvement in terms of responsiveness and proactive assistance. Redwood Software's customer service and support have garnered predominantly positive reviews, with customers describing it as good and helpful.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Control-M was generally user-friendly and supported by informative guides and videos. Nevertheless, a few users encountered difficulties in converting jobs or dealing with database problems. Redwood Software was described as intricate and time-consuming. However, after completing the setup, it resulted in a smaller system footprint and facilitated easy upgrades.
Pricing: Control-M has a high setup cost, including expenses like infrastructure and salaries. This can be burdensome for smaller companies due to the pricing being based on the number of jobs or endpoints. Redwood Software has a more innovative pricing model that is based on job executions. This makes it cost-effective and advantageous for companies looking to explore new platforms.
ROI: The Control-M product offers advantages such as reduced expenses, enhanced task performance, stability, and efficient data handling. Users of Redwood have experienced time savings and improved job scheduling, resulting in a return on investment.
Comparison Results: The user reviews indicate that Control-M is the preferred product compared to Redwood. Users appreciate Control-M for its easy setup, consistent performance, useful features like Managed File Transfer and Role-Based Administration, and its ability to improve operational efficiency. Control-M stands out with its more extensive solution, greater automation, user-friendly interface, and the value it brings to organizations.
"The unified view where you can define, orchestrate, and monitor applications, workflows, and data pipelines is important because we have more than one team working on Control-M. We have a support team, a job-creation team, and a SAP team. We can all work together on it. It avoids anyone from working on his part and not using the latest modifications."
"The pressure on our operations and our maintenance has been reduced."
"Most valuable feature would be the ability to detect and notify when a process has not completed successfully."
"The ability to dynamically predict batch run time is so valuable."
"Workload Archiving is a very good feature for us. It helps with our customer requirements in terms of reporting and auditing... Previously, when we didn't have any archive server, we managed the data in Control-M with man-made scripts, and we would pull the data for the last 365 days, or three or four months back. Since we installed the archiving, we have been able to pull the data, anytime and anywhere, with just one click."
"Control-M is useful to automate all critical and non-critical processes. Using Control-M, we can automate application workflows as well as file transfers involved in application workflows. We can also use it to run batches related to applications. Automating these processes reduces the RTO and RPO, which helps in the case of failures. It also helps us to identify bottlenecks and take corrective measures."
"It has a very good GUI. We can search for a job very easily. The web interface, user account creation, and access control are very good. From an access control point of view, we can provide access to as many users as we want. A second group of users can be given a certain number of features, according to the requirements. The web interface is very easy for end users to login and use. A lot of features have been added, e.g., adding jobs. They can add jobs to their stuff, whatever they want, then get it validated by the scheduling team and work it into production."
"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."
"Redwood helps us to schedule batch jobs on a daily, weekly, and yearly basis to keep the business running smoothly."
"By automating the job processes it has saved us a lot of time and resources."
"It saves us a lot of time and money by doing jobs automatically."
"This product is simple and easy to use."
"It's a very powerful tool. It has a lot of flexibility for how you can define jobs and build them. There are different ways in which you can construct jobs depending on your specific needs and requirements."
"It has advanced features like dashboards where users can see all statistics."
"We can achieve anything that anything that we would like to do. In SAP, it's not generally possible with just with SAP. So we have solution manager as an option, but run by job."
"Redwood is of value to our organization due to of its ease of use and the ability to automate and orchestrate any platform that we utilize today."
"The infrastructure updates could use improvement. Some of the previous updates that we have run to get to version nineteen were troublesome. So, a more seamless upgrade path for the infrastructure components would be useful. I don't know if they have replaced that in version 20 or if version 20 has an easier path, but I would like to see the upgrade from one version to the next version be a little smoother."
"You need to pay for extra features if you need them."
"I would like to have a web version of Control-M to replace the client. Currently, our support and jobs-creation teams are using the client and that needs to be installed on a PC. It's very heavy, consuming a lot of resources compared to the web portal. I know that they're trying to improve the client with the latest version, but for me, there hasn't been enough improvement yet."
"But for some issues, BMC will suggest to upgrade to new version which will not be feasible to standards of the organisation. Hence some work around should be shown to run the business until new version was upgraded."
"It is a very strong product, but the reporting could be better."
"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."
"While they have a very good reporting facility, the reports that I'm asked to produce, a lot of times aren't necessarily what we need."
"I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product."
"There is a lack of resources and product documentation which, if included, would help to gain more knowledge about the application."
"We need the ability to pull data into an Excel format."
"The addition of machine learning capabilities could help Redwood Workload Automation Software better predict job and workflow performance, detect anomalies, and optimize operations based on historical data."
"Enhancing the user interface would make it more appealing to new users with limited technical knowledge."
"I have not noted any downsides."
"Due to the abundance of competing automation technologies available on the market, connectivity with any cloud platform can be improved."
"The only issue at first was that we had to manually delete or raise the event in order to run some of the events and wait for jobs, even if the file was kept at the correct AL11 position."
"Customer support should be enhanced so that we can automatically raise tickets and incidents in customer service."
Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 110 reviews while Redwood RunMyJobs is ranked 3rd in Workload Automation with 30 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Redwood RunMyJobs is rated 9.6. The top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Redwood RunMyJobs writes "Simple to use, increases CPU speed, and reduces the cost of machine time". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas Redwood RunMyJobs is most compared with Stonebranch, Tidal by Redwood, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Workload Automation and Automic Automation Intelligence. See our Control-M vs. Redwood RunMyJobs 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.
