We performed a comparison between ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Stonebranch based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Tidal Software by Redwood, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation."The solution can scale."
"I have found the agents to be so much simpler, when compared to ESP."
"The features are upgraded, and every six months they're releasing patches."
"Stonebranch performs well, and the graphical representation is excellent. Overall, it requires more technical effort from our teams, but the solution is intuitive, so anybody can use it."
"We like that it has GUI and is not just a command line."
"The interface is very user-friendly and easy to navigate."
"I like the dashboard and the various workflows."
"The tasks are incredibly capable, and as long as you name them with a nice, uniform naming convention, they are very useful. You can create some interesting workflows through various machines, or you can just have it kick off single tasks. All in all, I really like the Universal Task. You can do some mutually exclusive stuff, such as an "A not B" kind of thing. It has a lot of capabilities behind the scenes."
"The most valuable feature is the reliability of the agents, because we need them accessible and we need to run stuff. The agent technology and compatibility are top-notch."
"The new version is going to have more web services where you could string together various web services so that you can create a workflow across multiple web services, which I don't think is there today."
"It's not available on the cloud, so they should take that due to safety, security, and scalability."
"It can't handle negative written codes."
"There is room for improvement with its connectivity with the Microsoft SRS system. It is very weak. They keep telling us it works with it, and technically it does, but it does not provide a lot of visibility. We have lost a lot of visibility migrating to Stonebranch, compared with just running tasks on the SRS server. That's really about the only thing that is a sore point for us."
"It would be ideal if they had the exact same features as the CA Workload Automation DE series. It would be helpful to have calendaring options."
"I would rate Stonebranch somewhere in the middle for ease of setup. It wasn't too straightforward for us because our infrastructure is complex."
"Stonebranch Universal Automation Center could improve the analytics."
"It can be hard to manage the task monitor."
"The Universal Controller is decent for the money it costs... It needs some work to have full features, compared to other products that are out there, specifically IBM's Workload Scheduler."
Earn 20 points
ESP Workload Automation Intelligence is ranked 23rd in Workload Automation while Stonebranch is ranked 16th in Workload Automation with 26 reviews. ESP Workload Automation Intelligence is rated 8.0, while Stonebranch is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of ESP Workload Automation Intelligence writes "Stable, connects with everything, and has great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Stonebranch writes "Allowed us to develop workflows without having to train and develop very specialized skillsets". ESP Workload Automation Intelligence is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence, whereas Stonebranch is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Redwood RunMyJobs, IBM Workload Automation and VisualCron.
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.