We performed a comparison between Control-M and Nintex Process Platform 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."It has multiple features. You can plan your execution in Control-M. It provides one single window where you can define workflows regardless of geographic boundaries and platforms. A batch process can be executed from this single window. It provides insights into your processes. Your business people will know what process they are running and what is the state of the process. Instead of knowing that they're not going to meet the SLA the next morning, the business people immediately know the changes in their process. Control-M is very easy. I can tell a non-technical person that this is how it works, and he would be able to easily understand it. Business people can understand the methodology of Control-M and the intuitive features that it has. It has a fantastic graphical user interface and is easy to understand. You just have to drag and drop but in a very intuitive way. Monitoring features are also good. It has different color coding schemes, which can help you to understand the status of your workflow. An operator who is not that technical and is just monitoring the status of the application can see by color-coding the status of a process. If anything goes wrong or a process is stuck, it gives you a hint. You can just right-click and see the logs and the output. Even if the system is not right there in the data center and is located somewhere else, you can monitor it right from there and see the workflows."
"The File Watcher utility, cyclic jobs, and email alert notification are valuable."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"In the client, it provides a unified view for me. I can alter the view that I want to see jobs and conditions. This is nice to have. The fact that you can see everything in one space is very important, especially these days where everything is about data and monitoring as well as because we are working from home on a global basis. So, I can monitor jobs in real-time, along with any failures or anything that might be stuck. The real-time monitoring and the ability to see everything in one place is important for us because we operate 24/7."
"The most valuable features are the GUI console, stability, and workflow."
"The feature we use most in Control-M is related to the file transfer module. It is quite advanced compared to the other tools like Automate, etc. The new version which has come of same MFT has a lot of advanced features which makes it very easy to work with. There is less need for written programs and more GUI-based stuff."
"This solution is very easy to use and customize, using almost zero coding. It's built on SharePoint which many companies in our country have experience with. This made it easy to adapt the application in our environment."
"The SharePoint feature is a really good connection, there are many features that are good."
"NWC forms could be better. Also, the ability to build workflows that are not dependent on SharePoint is very desirable. The forms feature just isn’t as functional as the forms for SharePoint."
"I think that it adds value to any organization, mainly in terms of business applications where you need workflows."
"Allows us to provide desktop/laptop and mobile solutions to our users."
"It provides data accuracy with fewer failures."
"It has helped us a lot, especially during the initial phase of a project where most of the things are done on paper."
"Out of box connectivity with UiPath."
"You need to pay for extra features if you need them."
"With the current version update, I'm not sure why we needed a separate database upgrade. Why not put it all in one package? Previously, you could do it either via a manual upgrade or an in-place upgrade but it wasn't separate."
"A developer sandbox could be very helpful to try out new features or experience them."
"There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly."
"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."
"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."
"Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features."
"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."
"The cost of the solution is high and has room for improvement."
"Built-in reporting on-prem is limited and clunky at best."
"Currently, it's taking quite some time to deploy a package, it needs improvement"
"It's very tedious to manage."
"Converting a document from PDF to MS Word, or vice versa, needs to be improved."
"Nintex is still at the starting point of integrating with AI. It has integrated with a very small piece of artificial intelligence., like only integrated with the Google Cloud. There is a benefit, like a no-code and low-code solution. But, again, if you are a developer, especially if you are a hardcore developer, you are using your code knowledge, its skills, and all. And, suddenly, you are moving into the low-code solution, and then you will feel, like, so many things you can't achieve with the low-code solution."
"While Nintex Workflow has pretty robust troubleshooting abilities, I think that improving the default logging and notifications would be helpful."
"Heavy, cumbersome and inflexible."
Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews while Nintex Process Platform is ranked 8th in Process Automation with 21 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Nintex Process Platform is rated 8.0. 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 Nintex Process Platform writes "Offers good integration capabilities and easy to learn and good stability". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Automic Workload Automation, whereas Nintex Process Platform is most compared with Camunda, IBM BPM, Appian, Pega BPM and Bizagi. See our Control-M vs. Nintex Process Platform report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors and best Workload 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.
