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.
"To me, what's most valuable in AutoSys Workload Automation is its robustness and quickness. The tool can trigger jobs within a few milliseconds, and it can handle large volumes of jobs."
"The web UI is beneficial and the granular security policies allow us to cover all of our audit requirements."
"The most valuable aspects of AutoSys Workload Automation are its performance, scalability, and ease of getting started for new users."
"The most valuable feature of AutoSys Workload Automation is user-friendliness. If someone has some knowledge of the tool they can use it."
"The capabilities of the product to schedule on multiple platforms, multiple operating systems."
"It streamlines processing really well, so we're able to cut down on our processing times."
"I prefer AutoSys over the other ones out there for ease of use, ease of understanding, and getting people to understand how the tool works."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the functions are easy to use."
"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."
"Self Service, BIM features are most valuable. As no need to login to EM client and check the job status."
"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."
"We use Control-M for maintenance on our Oracle and SQL Server databases. It automates maintenance on packages, including standard procedures on the databases themselves, snapshots, checking integrity, verifying the RDBMS of the databases, etc. It ensures they aren't clogged and that they are running smoothly and that there aren't any jobs stuck, eating up the performance of the server or any of the CPU cores."
"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."
"The web interface is handy. It's easy to use, and Control-M provides you with the necessary materials to understand the features and perform various tasks."
"It has certainly helped speed things up."
"If they have ad hoc requirements, then they can theoretically schedule their own file transfers with the Self Service. We are trying to push as much work back to the customers or developers that have that requirement, because they prefer to help themselves, if possible. We try empowering them and enabling them through Control-M, especially for file transfers, because it is a much broader base of the business then just with batch scheduling. Typically, with SAP batch scheduling, it would work with dedicated teams. With file transfers, the entire business is involved. There are business users, end users, etc. It definitely needs to be as simple as possible and as managed as well as possible. They need to manage it themselves, if possible, because our team is not growing but the number of customers, applications, and jobs are growing. We need to hand back some of the responsibility to the customer for them to resolve and action it."
"Needs better documentation with fully explained examples for some of the job types."
"Quick search feature and job analysis could be improved."
"CA installation processes are never anything but complex."
"The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement."
"Some of the reports are either a bit hard to understand or don’t give you what you might expect to see."
"Ease of implementation for upgrades."
"They could do better supporting it. They have too many of the same type of products, so sometimes it doesn't get as much attention as it should."
"The WCC could be improved."
"In general, it is a very good product, and we are very happy with it. It meets all of our expectations."
"Right now, Control-M is the leader in EMA analysis, which is similar to Gartner. However, clients want to invest in a strong technology, and therefore this product needs to keep up with the high expectations set for it."
"Integration with some applications and platforms is complex and requires development. We have done some integration with the application integrator, but it was more like a manual solution. This is an area that can be improved."
"Control-M reporting is a bit of a pain point right now. Control-M doesn't have robust reporting. I would like to see better reporting options. I would like to be able to pull charts or statistics that look nicer. Right now, we can pull some data, but it is kind of choppy. It would be nicer to have enterprise-level reporting that you can present to managers."
"We have some plug-ins like BOBJ, and we need a little improvement there. Other than that, it has been pretty good. I haven't seen any issues."
"It can definitely expand promotions, so that a single job can be moved. Currently you can only promote a job by promoting the entire table."
"Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support."
"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."
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.
