We performed a comparison between AutoSys Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: AutoSys Workload Automation is highly recommended for its scalability, ease of use, speed, and availability. Users appreciate its excellent job arrangement, task triggering, real-time batch processing view, software process integration, and user-friendly interface. The file transfer protocol and file watcher features are also praised. IBM Workload Automation is known for its ability to incorporate user-requested features, trigger jobs in multiple nodes, and conveniently track batch applications.
AutoSys Workload Automation users have expressed a need for integration with cloud services, simplified reporting and comparison of job performance, customizable reporting features and alerts, smoother migrations, enhanced handling of file transfer jobs, and the ability to monitor and manage workload windows. IBM Workload Automation users have encountered performance problems, navigation difficulties, challenges with daily schedule refreshes, complex simulation, stability and reporting visibility enhancements, and alignment with new technologies.
Service and Support: Users have positive feedback about the customer service of AutoSys Workload Automation, describing it as excellent, beneficial, and quick to respond. IBM Workload Automation also offers exceptional technical support, which customers depend on for problems that are out of their control. Nonetheless, there may be difficulties in pinpointing the origin of specific issues.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for AutoSys Workload Automation is considered to be simple, straightforward, and quick, while the setup for IBM Workload Automation can be difficult for those who are unfamiliar with IBM tools.
Pricing: The setup cost for AutoSys Workload Automation involves a yearly subscription, an annual license, and a one-time license for the server setup. The pricing for IBM Workload Automation is dependent on the customer's contract and can fluctuate depending on the number of agents installed.
ROI: The effectiveness of AutoSys Workload Automation in terms of ROI is influenced by factors such as the size of the organization, the complexity of the workload, and the efficiency of its implementation. IBM Workload Automation focuses on enhancing efficiency, minimizing expenses, and boosting productivity.
Comparison Results: AutoSys Workload Automation is the preferred choice compared to IBM Workload Automation. Users appreciate AutoSys for its easy setup process, scalability, ease of use, speed, and availability. It offers a user-friendly interface, file transfer protocol, and file watcher features.
"The scheduling feature allows us to know when jobs are going to run and makes sure they run in the order needed."
"The CA workload agent has gotten much better. For our organization it's important for us to communicate in a secure fashion between the host and the other platforms, and we are able to do that with our CA product"
"Integration with multiple services and applications across the enterprise."
"We use CA Workload Automation AE r11.3.6 to automate enterprise-wide scheduling and file transfers using an FTP plugin."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the functions are easy to use."
"We automate recurring processes, keeping track of IT processes controlled worldwide."
"The initial setup is easy."
"It gives a real-time view of all the batch processing that we have. Monitoring-wise, it is really good."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"I have supported this product in literally 100s of different environments and its unmatched in its ability to scale to any size."
"Technical support from IBM is very good."
"The support from Cisco is very good. I was with them as a company for 40 years"
"Provides a robust, full spectrum enterprise-wide WLA platform."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The technical support is great, the product is easy-to-use, and it is stable."
"The most important feature is the creation of folders. It's a really great feature because you can organize the process with naming conventions."
"Reduce the number of operational files. This would make the job of a system programmer supporting ESP easier."
"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."
"Pricing model for distributed should have an Enterprise option."
"SQL server clustering is not supported."
"Performance improvements in the UI would be appreciated."
"The visibility and control features are somewhat limited."
"We have to escalate through channels to get to somebody who knows what's going on. It takes time that we do not necessarily have."
"AutoSys Workload Automation could improve the integration."
"Scalability-wise, it can be a little bit challenging."
"This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly."
"It is missing some features and can improve in areas where the competition is somewhat better like linking job dependencies."
"It should support other schedulers that aren't IBM products."
"The schedule refreshes daily and that's a challenge for us."
"The configuration of IBM Workload Automation has some challenges. We have a difficult time customizing it, but it is similar to other solutions."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile app that could be used to follow the job schedule."
"There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."
AutoSys Workload Automation is ranked 6th in Workload Automation with 79 reviews while IBM Workload Automation is ranked 13th in Workload Automation with 28 reviews. AutoSys Workload Automation is rated 8.4, while IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.2. 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 IBM Workload Automation writes "With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes". AutoSys Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Automic Workload Automation, Stonebranch and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas IBM Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, HCL Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Tidal by Redwood and BMC Compuware ThruPut Manager. See our AutoSys Workload Automation vs. IBM Workload Automation 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.