Compare CA Workload Automation vs. Control-M

CA Workload Automation is ranked 3rd in Workload Automation with 21 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 20 reviews. CA Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while Control-M is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CA Workload Automation writes "We need to have things run in a very sequential order, so it is very useful that we can schedule work flows". 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". CA Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, Automic Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation, whereas Control-M is most compared with CA Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation and Automic Workload Automation. See our CA Workload Automation vs. Control-M report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Workload Automation vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
384,324 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
The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler.I have found new methods for converting scripts from Dollar U to ONE Automation. For example, I take the dynamic library from Dollar U and put it in the dynamic binary library in ONE Automation. This enables us to use Dollar U scripts in ONE Automation.The most valuable feature is the one for SAP batch processing... There are certain other mid-level workload automation tools which can handle the OS level, but SAP is something which is really very critical. Automic stands out from the ordinary tools because handling SAP processes is absolutely easy with it.It saves a lot of time and mistakes, because we used to do a lot of manual work. Since we added automation a little bit over a year now, it has enhanced our daily work.We automate very manual, robust tasks, which are very time consuming and not error-free.We impose some standards for backup and restore operations.An important feature is the ability to modify PeopleSoft Run Controls at run-time.It's pretty stable. After implementation, there hasn't been a single event where we shifted our jobs for the day from automated to manual.

Read more »

This solution enables us to improve our daily processing times. We can do everything faster than before we used this solution.It is a fairly stable solution.The web UI is beneficial and the granular security policies allow us to cover all of our audit requirements.Automic Automation Engine provides us the ability to map logic using a scripting language.We automate recurring processes, keeping track of IT processes controlled worldwide.It has helped to simplify cross-dependency between MVS and Open systems jobs.We use CA Workload Automation AE r11.3.6 to automate enterprise-wide scheduling and file transfers using an FTP plugin.It has improved my organization by automating IT applications.

Read more »

I find it very helpful to be able to keep track of all our help desk tickets.The Automation API has opened up a world of possibilities for us, including the ability to create workflows on-demand using traditional DevOps tools.Most of our tasks also deal with databases, and Control-M's purpose-built module for the databases comes in very handy when handling database components.BIM is a good tool to monitor SLAs, and being a financial organization, this is a very good feature for us.The most valuable features are the managing of file transfers and the product keeping up with technology.The monitoring tool is very good. It's very easy for expert and entry-level users to use on 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.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.

Read more »

Cons
I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution.There were many bugs in the last version. For example, we could only use capital letters for searching for agent names. Also, we had a problem with ONE Automation where we couldn't use the PGA and SGA in Oracle Databases for resolving RAM because the last version didn't have this capability.There are certain jobs that are triggered one after another. It would be helpful to have a more user-friendly way of seeing how these jobs are connecting from one server to another.Depending on the properties of the jobs and pre- and post-conditions, there needs to be more flexible and richer conditions that I can check for. This would be a great addition.There could be a better user interface for end users. They should make it more intuitive, not based on Java.With every new version, things that would previously work, Automic breaks them. So, we have to report the new bugs. Therefore, every time when we patch the system, there is usually a new bug or a feature that was working, then it stops working.There are some scripting elements that could be added.Some of the things we don't do are mainly because we don't know how to do them. Hands-on training can be expensive, so we find other ways to work around things to forgo the hands-on training. It is also an issue because we are a Linux shop and most trainers are Windows-based.

Read more »

There is a slow response time by tech support. Unless, you say it's severity level one. That will give you a two hour timing window for them to call you. It doesn't really happen exactly in two hours, but they try.Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated.It lacks support and integration with cloud computing platforms.We see improvement possibilities in the processing provision of predefined evaluations or individual objects, or in the Self Service portal, which can be used by any user to monitor objects or start objects.Reduce the number of operational files. This would make the job of a system programmer supporting ESP easier.The WCC could be improved.​The cross-platform arena, where you can run work on multiple platforms, needs improvement.Needs better documentation with fully explained examples for some of the job types.

Read more »

There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly.The next major release needs to focus on the lightweight web client.A developer sandbox could be very helpful to try out new features or experience them.The Control-M API does not support SQL database-type jobs, where a job has been configured to use the SQL catalog to locate SSIS.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.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.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.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.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
I only know that AWA is cheaper than Control-M, but I'm not aware of the numbers.Certain licenses can be a bit expensive. The PeopleSoft agents, in particular, are a bit pricey.This is a support system for us, not our core business, so we purchased this product inexpensively.We came to a very good deal, but it took us three years to finalize.We have increased efficiency with this application.We receive time efficiency from this product.Every time there is a task which must be repeated, the solution can reduce costs.There are a lot of new features, but we do not use them because they are too expensive. The price point could be less.

Read more »

It is overpriced.I certainly think the pricing is worth the value.People need to pay attention to how they use their ESP agents on the distributed platform. That's where some of the cost comes in, based on how many you need or how many you use.CA pricing has been a problem, and not looked upon favorably here at all.

Read more »

Licensing costs are around $3000 a year.Pricing can be steep, but you get what you pay for.It works on task-based licensing.This product saves hours in a day based on my experience working here versus other companies with manually operations.We have a five-year contract with task-based licensing.As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost.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.we are more looking for a better cost/license/performance model because BMC, while we could say it's the best, is also the most expensive. That is what we are probably most annoyed with. We are paying something like €1,000,000 over three years for having 4,000 jobs running. That's expensive.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
384,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 47% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Also Known As
Automic Dollar UniverseControl-M
Learn
CA (A Broadcom Company)
CA (A Broadcom Company)
BMC
Overview

Deliver the fully agile enterprise using CA Automic Workload Automation 

The modern enterprise needs to orchestrate a complex, diverse landscape of applications, platforms and technologies. Workload automation can prove a critical differentiator, but only if it provides intelligent automation driven by data analytics.

The IT landscape is currently more complex than ever: Islands of automation are a barrier to scaling and standardizing your workload activities. Processing errors are common because of manual handoffs. And the lack of an end-to-end view of the business process make inefficiencies and problems difficult to resolve. In addition to this, you are operating 24x7 and cannot find maintenance windows to upgrade your infrastructure in order to innovate. 

CA Automic Workload Automation gives you the agility, speed, visibility and scalability needed to respond to the constantly changing technology landscape. It centrally manages and automates the execution of business processes end-to-end; across mainframe, cloud and hybrid environments in a way that never stops—even when doing an upgrade to the next version.

CA Workload Automation is an enterprise scheduling solution for the automation of IT processes in a heterogeneous environment. It automates and delivers millions of mission-essential services across thousands of companies worldwide. With the CA team and expert community, you get so much more than software. Work with us to get to mission-accomplished—every second of your business.

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 Automic Workload Automation
Learn more about CA Workload Automation
Learn more about Control-M
Sample Customers
ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESBGaumont, Mercantil do Brasil, CCEE, Hanwha LifeCARFAX, ChipRewards, Sun Chemical, University of California, Unum
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm35%
Manufacturing Company14%
Insurance Company9%
Comms Service Provider7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company24%
Financial Services Firm21%
Government10%
Marketing Services Firm7%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm50%
Insurance Company13%
Energy/Utilities Company12%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company28%
Financial Services Firm17%
Government7%
Manufacturing Company6%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm43%
Healthcare Company9%
Retailer9%
Insurance Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company37%
Financial Services Firm10%
Marketing Services Firm9%
Comms Service Provider7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise20%
Large Enterprise71%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise10%
Large Enterprise84%
REVIEWERS
Small Business11%
Midsize Enterprise6%
Large Enterprise83%
REVIEWERS
Small Business9%
Midsize Enterprise15%
Large Enterprise76%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business2%
Midsize Enterprise1%
Large Enterprise98%
Find out what your peers are saying about CA Workload Automation vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
384,324 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email