Compare Ansible vs. Control-M

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Ansible Logo
36,067 views|28,217 comparisons
Control-M Logo
32,606 views|13,703 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, HCL, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: February 2021.
464,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
"Ansible provides great reliability when coupled with a versioning system (git). It helps providing predictability to the network by knowing exactly what's being pushed after validating it in production.""It has improved our organization through provisioning and security hardening. When we do get a new VM, we have been able to bring on a provisional machine in less than a day. This morning alone, I provisioned two machines within an hour. I am talking about hardening, installing antivirus software on it, and creating user accounts because the Playbooks were predesigned. From the time we got the servers to the actual hand-off, it takes less than an hour. We are talking about having the servers actually authenticate Red Hat Satellites and run the yum updates. All of that can be done within an hour."

More Ansible Pros »

"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.""We value Control-M mainly for the ability to control multiple nodes in a coordinated manner. Control-M has the ability to really coordinate across a lot of nodes.""Control-M has improved application reliability and the SLAs in our company by quite a bit. You can see if problems are coming. If we have an SLA in a couple of hours, we know well before that couple hours if processing is behind, and it allows us to take some preventative action.""It has absolutely saved us time. It has made us more efficient. As far as the processing between systems, we don't have as many people. They have been able to focus on other efforts, because we have been able to automate more stuff with Control-M.""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.""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.""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 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."

More Control-M Pros »

Cons
"Accessibility. Ansible uses a CLI by default. Those accustomed to it can find their way and adopt the YAML files easily over time. But, some users are more comfortable using UIs...""When you set up Playbooks, I may have one version of the Playbook, but another member of the team may have a different vision, and we will not know which version is correct. We want to have one central repository for managing the different versions of Playbooks, so we can have better collaboration among team members. This is our use case for using Git version control."

More Ansible Cons »

"One feature I would like to include is in the middle of the monitoring domain. In the monitoring domain, if I have to update a number of jobs, the only way to do it is by manually clicking on each job. I would like a feature that allows me to do a mass update in the jobs, which I feel is still lacking.""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.""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.""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.""The initial setup was complex, because I wasn't used to it.""The reporting tool still needs a lot of improvement. It was supposed to get better with the upgrade, and it really didn't get better. It needs help, because it's such a useful thing to have. It needs to be more powerful and easier to use.""I'm not sure how the solution fits together with our business modernization initiatives, as there are things outside of my area, even though Control-M is the scheduling tool of the company. They may use other things, e.g., Big Data.""I would like not to have to reach out to a third-party application company to do automated notifications. Right now, we still have people manually calling people and emailing people. There's a company called xMatters - and there are others - that has an API through Control-M that can automate any aspect of failure management. I'd like to see it build right into the product. I'd like to see a better notification product."

More Control-M Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Red Hat's open source approach was a factor when choosing Ansible, since the solution is free as of right now."

More Ansible Pricing and Cost Advice »

"We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost.""As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost.""We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing.""This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manually operations.""It works on task-based licensing.""Licensing costs are around $3000 a year.""Pricing can be steep, but you get what you pay for."

More Control-M Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
464,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Top Answer: Please look at Enterprise Management Associates webpage. They are doing kind of deep analysis and comparison of all leading WLA products. I can also provide you this report 
Top Answer: Task-based or, alternatively, a fixed number of Agents. Task-based would, I feel, be much more popular in the market. I have worked ta sites that license anything from 5,000 to 500,000 jobs (i.e… more »
Ranking
3rd
Views
36,067
Comparisons
28,217
Reviews
3
Average Words per Review
768
Rating
9.0
1st
out of 29 in Workload Automation
Views
32,606
Comparisons
13,703
Reviews
17
Average Words per Review
634
Rating
8.7
Popular Comparisons
Also Known As
Control M
Learn More
Overview
Ansible is the simplest way to deploy your applications. It gives you the power to deploy multi-tier applications reliably and consistently, all from one common framework. You can configure needed services as well as push application artifacts from one common system.

Control‑M is a digital enterprise management solution that simplifies and automates diverse batch application workloads while reducing failure rates, improving SLAs, and accelerating application deployment. 

Automate job scheduling and application deployment

  • Connect applications and workflow processes to quickly and reliably deliver business services
  • Realize the potential of big data while freeing IT for other tasks
  • Take control of your file transfer operations with secure scheduling, instant status visibility, and automated recovery
  • Accelerate application change and deployment cycle times with automated application workflow between test and production
  • Empower users to make decisions in real time and perform basic tasks in a view and language they understand
  • Deploy Control-M on-premises or on the cloud
Offer
Learn more about Ansible
Learn more about Control-M
Sample Customers
HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBank
CARFAX, ChipRewards, Sun Chemical, University of California, Unum
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Healthcare Company27%
Comms Service Provider13%
Legal Firm13%
Financial Services Firm13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company32%
Comms Service Provider16%
Financial Services Firm9%
Government7%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm43%
Healthcare Company8%
Retailer8%
Transportation Company5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company43%
Comms Service Provider11%
Financial Services Firm10%
Insurance Company7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business25%
Midsize Enterprise8%
Large Enterprise67%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise78%
REVIEWERS
Small Business15%
Midsize Enterprise13%
Large Enterprise72%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise80%
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, HCL, Red Hat and others in Configuration Management. Updated: February 2021.
464,857 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Ansible is ranked 3rd in Configuration Management with 3 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 18 reviews. Ansible is rated 9.0, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Ansible writes "Its agentless, making the deployment fast and easy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "File transfer module is quite advanced, this version has less need for written programs and is more GUI-based". Ansible is most compared with SCCM, BigFix, Red Hat Satellite, VMware vRealize Automation (vRA) and Chef, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Automic Workload Automation, ASG-Zena and Stonebranch Universal Automation Center.

See our list of .

We monitor all Configuration Management 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.