We performed a comparison between Control-M and Tidal Automation 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 a range of valuable features such as managed file transfer, secure storage for credentials, seamless integration capabilities, role-based administration, collaboration dashboards, efficient scheduling, easy configuration, and accurate forecasting. Tidal Automation also provides valuable features like a job scheduler, a unified and intuitive interface, flexibility in running jobs, effective error handling, role-based access control, and dynamic job scheduling.
Control-M can enhance its microservices and API integration, address bugs in the web interface, streamline the upgrade process, and integrate with third-party tools. Tidal Automation needs improvement in its graphical user interface, pricing model, cloud/hybrid solution, migration process, artificial intelligence capabilities, user interface intuitiveness, initial setup process, security features, and performance scalability.
Service and Support: Control-M's customer service elicits a range of opinions, with some customers commending the prompt and knowledgeable support staff, while others express reservations about slow response times and the desire for more proactive assistance. Tidal Automation's customer service receives widespread acclaim for its responsiveness, expertise, and willingness to assist. The support team is consistently described as experienced and well-versed in the product.
Ease of Deployment: Users found the initial setup for Control-M to be straightforward and easy, with a relatively short deployment time. Learning the system and implementing it was considered manageable. The initial setup for Tidal Automation was also described as straightforward and easy, however, with a longer deployment process. Learning how to use the system was relatively simple, with a slightly steeper learning curve for administrators.
Pricing: The cost of setting up Control-M has garnered diverse feedback, as some users find it costly due to hardware and licensing expenses for each job. Furthermore, pricing and licensing can be perplexing, particularly for smaller businesses. Users perceive the pricing of Tidal Automation as reasonable and predictable, with a transparent and easily comprehensible licensing model.
ROI: Control-M offers advantages such as reduced expenses, enhanced job setup, stability, and efficient data transfers. Tidal Automation delivers cost savings, improved efficiency, and better risk management.
Comparison Results: Control-M emerges as the favored choice compared to Tidal Automation. Users appreciate Control-M's user-friendly and effortless setup process, as well as its comprehensive guides and videos. They also value its capability to automate file transfers and provide a consolidated view for monitoring workflows.
"Control-M is excellent when it comes to building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows. Those workflows are of very high importance to our operations."
"The Automation API has opened up a world of possibilities for us, including the ability to create workflows on-demand using traditional DevOps tools."
"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 initial setup is straightforward."
"Monitoring is a valuable aspect of it. The monitoring tool is very good, and it is easy for expert and entry level users to use on a short notice."
"It is simple to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines and to ingest data from different platforms. It integrates well between platforms."
"If a job fails, that development team is notified right away, which improves reliability. Previously, it was on the operators to notify the developers that their job failed, erred, or aborted. Now, it's all automated."
"My organization has been able to script scheduled jobs in Control-M to potentially replace legacy products that are at end of life or end of service. The previous backup applications that were being used for specific files, folders, or applications were no longer being supported, therefore being able to use Control-M to replace that has been very valuable."
"It's easy to use and easy to administer, and it's very flexible."
"The best feature of Tidal Workload Automation Software is its ease of integration with other systems, including ERP, CRM, and BI tools."
"It has been super stable. There are no complaints on stability. We would not be using it if Tidal wasn't stable."
"The first, big thing that we got out of using Tidal Workload Automation was having a centralized view of the status of all of our batch processes across all these systems... We can look into the schedule at any given time and see if things are running on track or if they are falling behind. We can also see if something failed."
"Tidal Workload Automation Software provides the ability to quickly adapt to changing business requirements."
"From a management standpoint, when using the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads, I've never had a problem with the application. It's very interactive, especially with the different security levels that they offer."
"The thing that I like the most is the reliability of the engine. The actual scheduling part of the product is pretty much flawless, but the stability of the product is what I find to be reassuring."
"Tidal Automation software provides real-time monitoring and alerts, allowing users to track job progress and identify potential issues before they cause delays or errors."
"I think it's slightly expensive but at the same time it's a good product."
"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."
"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."
"The main area that could be improved would be documentation, just like every other software product out there!"
"A smartphone interface would be welcome."
"The performance could be better. Control-M Enterprise Manager tends to slow the system down even on a server with a six-core processor and 32 gigabytes RAM. The console is Java-based, so maybe OpenJDK 16 or 17 would be a performance improvement."
"Its installation can be better. Currently, we have to install it manually. The file transfer feature can also be improved. It is not very easy to transfer a file from business to business. In terms of new features, they can include new technologies. It can have API integration."
"Its operations and infrastructure can be improved."
"For the most part, the drill-down and the logging are really good. But if we take an Informatica job, for example: We have the ability, and the operators have the ability, to actually drill down and see, at a session level, where the failure is. There is, unfortunately, no way to extract that into an actual output email or failure email. It's not that that information is not available, but extracting it into an email would be a nice-to-have."
"The user interface is the place that needs the most work. If and when we find issues with the product, they are usually in that area. If I had to choose, that's where I'd want issues, as opposed to in the engine. But the UI is average. It's a little sluggish at times and there are some bugs in it."
"From an administrative point of view, I wouldn't give really high marks to the solution. I actually entertained getting the JAWS application at one point. One of the shortcomings with the scheduler is the reporting capabilities. At least at the time, JAWS was the best that they had for a third-party integration. I think they've got things in the pipeline to help alleviate that gap."
"Tidal's adaptability and user-friendliness could be increased by integrating it with additional programmes and platforms."
"I know they are working on it, but there needs to be better reporting. Currently, there are only three or four reports that we can get off of the system. That needs to be improved. They already have a solution to this in the new version. I.e., a schedule of all the jobs running for one day, specifically calling out what dependencies that job relies on. It would be like a flow chart of how the day's jobs would run."
"There are several improvement points that our team has provided to the vendor."
"When we patch to the next version, there is often a little thing that breaks. It has rarely been a big deal, but I always seem to have to follow up on one tiny issue. It would help if they had some better QA testing of their patches."
"I don't know if Tidal wants to get into the business of monitoring long-running jobs, but that could be a feature for the future: a job launching and monitoring tool. Using Tidal for monitoring doesn't seem like a good fit, but if they could offer something that did that as an add-on or include it, it might be helpful."
Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 110 reviews while Tidal by Redwood is ranked 2nd in Workload Automation with 37 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Tidal by Redwood is rated 9.0. 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 Tidal by Redwood writes "Great visibility with a single pane of glass and a low learning curve". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Camunda, whereas Tidal by Redwood is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs, ActiveBatch by Redwood and Rocket Zeke. See our Control-M vs. Tidal by Redwood 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.
