We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and Control-M based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Control-M comes out on top in this comparison. It is a very innovative and feature-rich solution and can be used to complete many diverse tasks and solve different issues, resulting in significant time savings and cost-effectiveness. Automic Workload Automation requires a bit of a learning curve, and some users tell us the web version is missing many of the solution's best features.
"We impose some standards for backup and restore operations."
"We have seen a cost improvement from it."
"It improves the visibility of what is going on on the system. If I have a problem, it is easy to identify, understand dependencies, and identifying the root causes than just running through scripts and searching through applications or servers."
"The initial setup was quite simple because they have a manual which tells you in a simple way of how to install it step-by-step."
"There are a lot of features which help us get a stable application. It is easy to have a stable production line, because this app supports us very well."
"The reason we went with Automic is very simple. We were using ESP, which was a Broadcom product. So, Automic happened to be a natural fit. It was a much easier transition from ESP to Automic. We had familiarity with the vendor and the product."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler."
"It is not possible do our jobs without automation software. Automic is a great help to us."
"We can tie together all the workloads across the estate and make the whole process reactive to events."
"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."
"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."
"Its compatibility with the new technologies and platforms, like the Google Cloud or Amazon, is the most valuable. Its console allows us to view the duration and execution of a process. It is also very easy to use and easy to implement."
"The File Watcher utility, cyclic jobs, and email alert notification are valuable."
"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."
"We are using Control-M for day-to-day operations only. It is helpful for us in our day-to-day operations. It is a key in our financial sector. We are automating via Control-M in our treasury operations, including any evening updates. Control-M makes things easier and faster by helping our treasury operations go without any interruptions."
"The most valuable features are the managing of file transfers and the product keeping up with technology."
"The workflows should be clearer and more expressive."
"The hotline can take a long time. They will say, "I will take it and give it to the Level 2 support.""
"There are some monitoring features that could be added."
"During installation, some database elective issues popped up. These took some time to fix, but after some back and forth communication, these issues were resolved."
"We have some problems with updates where some functions are changed, so you have to check your whole system to see if everything is still running. The update process for us is around two months of testing and one day of updates."
"There has to be a better way to visualize things in the application without having so many windows open."
"It is a bit of a problem, because they like to do email ping-pong via their web page. Sometimes, it would be much easier if someone would call you on the phone."
"Most of our issues are related to the system, not the job scheduling, such as, bugs and unexpected downtime of the application or database."
"A smartphone interface would be welcome."
"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."
"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."
"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."
"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."
"Control-M doesn't have any dynamic reporting facilities or features."
"Advanced File Transfer (AFT) has limitations that cause us to use a bit more licensing than we feel is appropriate."
"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."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 110 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation, AppWorx Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Redwood RunMyJobs. See our Automic 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.
