We performed a comparison between Autosys Workload Automation and Control-M based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: In this comparison, Control-M finishes ahead of Autosys Workload Automation. With Control-M, all documentation is available online; many users feel this is a big win. The solution is very stable in most environments and the solution is very easy to use. The consistent excellent 24/7 support is a benefit that really rounds out this amazing solution.
"The CA workload agent has gotten much better. For our organization it's important for us to communicate in a secure fashion between the host and the other platforms, and we are able to do that with our CA product"
"Integration with multiple services and applications across the enterprise."
"The web UI is beneficial and the granular security policies allow us to cover all of our audit requirements."
"It has allowed us to automate many of the functions of our operations staff. For instance, we had production control staff spending two hours a day entering date parms into our daily business processes. And now, CA Workload Automation does it for us."
"We get better reports than we use to have."
"This solution enables us to improve our daily processing times. We can do everything faster than before we used this solution."
"The solution has been stable."
"Automation of patch process."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting function. It allows us to pull up reports for specific information that the end-users are looking for."
"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."
"Maintaining and monitoring of workloads have been and continue to be the most valuable feature in our environment."
"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 scheduling and management were really good. Monitoring was also better. It had a good visual presentation. It showed me charts and all such things. It was really good on that side."
"Self Service, BIM features are most valuable. As no need to login to EM client and check the job status."
"Cross-platform support: A Linux job can be dependent on a Windows job, which can be dependent on many other flavours of hardware/software. Your batch is therefore managed by a single tool, allowing you to monitor your entire flow."
"Our ability to integrate with many different solutions has been invaluable. The new approach of the automation API and jobs-as-code is also valuable."
"Some support issues need to be addressed, but not through email, through personal contact via phone or WebEx."
"The reporting system, currently, could be better."
"Some of the reports are either a bit hard to understand or don’t give you what you might expect to see."
"CA Workload Automation is not part of CA's strategic vision going forward."
"SQL server clustering is not supported."
"To make it a lot more user-friendly, in order to make it so other people can use it without having to do much training with it; the more user-friendly it is, the easier it is to work with."
"The WCC could be improved."
"Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated."
"I would like to see more auditing capabilities. Right now, it has the basics and I've been trying to set those up to work with what our auditors are looking for."
"We would recommend modernizing the look and feel of Control-M. They also need to move towards more self-service and development in their environment. It's very antiquated."
"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."
"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."
"Some of the features are not available. We were about to deploy the REST API, but we had some challenges. We had to use a third-party application. So, it should be improved in terms of integrating REST API jobs. That was something that was lacking. The customer was not that happy in terms of getting the desired output. So, we had to use a third-party application called Hangfire. We would like to have more videos on REST API integration, and we would like to have easy integration with the Control-M application through the REST API."
"For installing or upgrading the PeopleSoft and SAP plugins, currently there is no way to do it via Control-M Configuration Manager. So, we are installing or upgrading the plugins, like PeopleSoft and SAP, manually. If BMC could provide an option via Control-M Configuration Manager to upgrade these plugins, it probably would reduce a lot of manual work as well as ease our work. This is one improvement that I personally want to see, because it would help our way of working."
"The main area that could be improved would be documentation, just like every other software product out there!"
"An issue we have run into in our lower environments is that Control-M can log you out frequently."
AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 110 reviews. AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AutoSys Workload Automation writes "Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with IBM Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Stonebranch, Automic Workload Automation and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas Control-M is most compared with IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence, Automic Workload Automation and Redwood RunMyJobs. See our AutoSys Workload Automation vs. Control-M 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.