Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Automic Automation Logo

Top 10 Automic Automation Alternatives

Vendor: Broadcom
4.2 out of 5
Leave a review

Top Automic Automation Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Automic Automation based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include Control-M, MuleSoft Anypoint Platform, and IBM Workload Automation. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

Automic Automation surpasses its competitors by offering scalable solutions, dynamic workload automation, and comprehensive dashboard analytics, enabling efficient process optimization and seamless integration across diverse IT environments while enhancing business performance and flexibility.

Broadcom Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Broadcom, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Automic Automation Logo
Control-M
4.4 out of 5
Automic Automation Logo
Control-M
4.4 out of 5
Control-M excels in integrating with legacy systems and offers extensive automation tools, making it ideal for environments like banking. In comparison, Automic Automation provides a customizable scripting language, offering flexibility across platforms, appealing to users requiring tailored workflow solutions and adaptable pricing.
Download Automic Automation vs. Control-M Report
Control-M's setup costs are generally considered higher, but many users find the investment worthwhile for its enterprise capabilities, while Automic Automation offers a more budget-friendly setup option, appealing to organizations seeking cost efficiency.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Control-M's setup costs are generally considered higher, but many users find the investment worthwhile for its enterprise capabilities, while Automic Automation offers a more budget-friendly setup option, appealing to organizations seeking cost efficiency.
Automic Automation Logo
Automic Automation Logo
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform
4.0 out of 5
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform excels in API management and scalability, appealing to businesses needing seamless integration. In comparison, Automic Automation is ideal for those prioritizing automation and scripting flexibility. Each solution satisfies unique operational needs, catering to distinct enterprise environments and priorities.
Download Automic Automation vs. MuleSoft Anypoint Platform Report
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform setup costs are noted for being higher, while Automic Automation's setup is streamlined and more cost-effective, highlighting the pricing distinction between the two solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
MuleSoft Anypoint Platform setup costs are noted for being higher, while Automic Automation's setup is streamlined and more cost-effective, highlighting the pricing distinction between the two solutions.
Automic Automation Logo
Automic Automation Logo
IBM Workload Automation
4.0 out of 5
IBM Workload Automation offers dynamic workload balancing and cross-platform integration, ideal for complex automation, while facing challenges in navigation and user interface complexity. In comparison, Automic Automation provides flexibility and intuitive design but encounters issues with workflow dependencies and pricing concerns.
Download Automic Automation vs. IBM Workload Automation Report
IBM Workload Automation has a straightforward setup process with lower initial costs, while Automic Automation features a more detailed configuration that may involve higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Workload Automation has a straightforward setup process with lower initial costs, while Automic Automation features a more detailed configuration that may involve higher initial expenses.
Automic Automation Logo
Redwood RunMyJobs
4.8 out of 5
Automic Automation Logo
Redwood RunMyJobs
4.8 out of 5
Automic Automation offers robust scripting capabilities and centralized management for versatile automation, ideal for diverse environments. In comparison, Redwood RunMyJobs provides ease of use with pre-defined processes and strong cloud capabilities, appealing to those seeking cost-effective solutions.
Download Automic Automation vs. Redwood RunMyJobs Report
Automic Automation offers a customizable setup with potentially higher initial costs, while Redwood RunMyJobs provides a more straightforward setup process with lower upfront expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation offers a customizable setup with potentially higher initial costs, while Redwood RunMyJobs provides a more straightforward setup process with lower upfront expenses.
Automic Automation Logo
Stonebranch
4.4 out of 5
Automic Automation Logo
Stonebranch
4.4 out of 5
Automic Automation offers robust integration across systems like SAP and Oracle with advanced scripting and notifications suitable for diverse OS environments. In comparison, Stonebranch excels with a flexible, feature-rich platform, providing extensive support for platform integrations and efficient task management.
Download Automic Automation vs. Stonebranch Report
Automic Automation involves a substantial upfront setup cost, whereas Stonebranch offers a more budget-friendly initial investment, making the latter a cost-effective choice for budget-conscious businesses.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation involves a substantial upfront setup cost, whereas Stonebranch offers a more budget-friendly initial investment, making the latter a cost-effective choice for budget-conscious businesses.
Automic Automation Logo
Tidal by Redwood
4.5 out of 5
Automic Automation Logo
Tidal by Redwood
4.5 out of 5
Automic Automation integrates with platforms like SAP and FTP, simplifying complex tasks. In comparison, Tidal by Redwood excels in cross-platform scheduling with job logging suitable for trading. Automic's higher cost aligns with efficiency, while Tidal offers cost-effective flexibility for larger enterprises.
Download Automic Automation vs. Tidal by Redwood Report
Automic Automation has a lower setup cost, while Tidal by Redwood requires more initial investment. The pricing difference reflects each product's setup complexity and resource requirements.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation has a lower setup cost, while Tidal by Redwood requires more initial investment. The pricing difference reflects each product's setup complexity and resource requirements.
Automic Automation Logo
Automic Automation Logo
ActiveBatch by Redwood
4.6 out of 5
Automic Automation offers versatility with scripting for custom solutions and complex environments. In comparison, ActiveBatch by Redwood emphasizes ease of use with pre-built job steps and integration capabilities. Automic excels in customization, while ActiveBatch provides competitive pricing and user-friendly features.
Download ActiveBatch by Redwood vs. Automic Automation Report
Automic Automation has a higher setup cost than ActiveBatch by Redwood. ActiveBatch offers a more budget-friendly implementation, contrasting with Automic Automation’s initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation has a higher setup cost than ActiveBatch by Redwood. ActiveBatch offers a more budget-friendly implementation, contrasting with Automic Automation’s initial investment.
Automic Automation Logo
OpCon
4.6 out of 5
Automic Automation Logo
OpCon
4.6 out of 5
Automic Automation offers robust compatibility and a flexible scripting language for complex workflows. In comparison, OpCon excels in user-friendly batch-processing automation and self-service features for non-technical users. Both provide different strengths, appealing to distinct operational needs.
Download Automic Automation vs. OpCon Report
Automic Automation incurs significant setup costs, whereas OpCon is more budget-friendly during the initial implementation stage. Users should note these differences when considering their investment in either solution.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation incurs significant setup costs, whereas OpCon is more budget-friendly during the initial implementation stage. Users should note these differences when considering their investment in either solution.
Automic Automation Logo
JAMS
4.4 out of 5
Automic Automation Logo
JAMS
4.4 out of 5
Automic Automation offers extensive automation with flexible integration, emphasizing security and scalability suitable for complex workflows. In comparison, JAMS provides effective scheduling and user-friendly execution methods, with competitive pricing appealing to cost-conscious buyers seeking ease of use and support.
Download Automic Automation vs. JAMS Report
Automic Automation incurs significant setup costs, while JAMS offers a more budget-friendly setup, highlighting a key cost advantage for JAMS users.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation incurs significant setup costs, while JAMS offers a more budget-friendly setup, highlighting a key cost advantage for JAMS users.
Automic Automation Logo
Automic Automation Logo
HCL Workload Automation
4.0 out of 5
Automic Automation offers flexibility and integration for complex workflows, favored for its job scheduling. In comparison, HCL Workload Automation provides extensive platform support and adaptability, appealing to diverse IT environments. Pricing contrasts with Automic's competitive setup versus HCL's long-term ROI.
Automic Automation's setup cost is noted for being higher, whereas HCL Workload Automation offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation's setup cost is noted for being higher, whereas HCL Workload Automation offers a more budget-friendly initial investment.
Automic Automation Logo
Axway Automator
3.0 out of 5
Automic Automation Logo
Axway Automator
3.0 out of 5
Automic Automation offers robust automation for complex workflows, making it ideal for large enterprises. In comparison, Axway Automator provides straightforward processes and cost-effective solutions, appealing to budget-conscious buyers requiring fast ROI and minimal setup effort.
Automic Automation has a higher setup cost, while Axway Automator is more budget-friendly, making it suitable for those with limited initial budgets.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation has a higher setup cost, while Axway Automator is more budget-friendly, making it suitable for those with limited initial budgets.
Automic Automation Logo
Automic Automation Logo
UiPath Orchestrator
4.1 out of 5
Automic Automation offers broad integrations with systems like SAP and Oracle, providing scalability and powerful scripting capabilities for managing complex workflows. In comparison, UiPath Orchestrator provides ease of use and centralized management, appealing to organizations focused on bot activity efficiency.
Download Automic Automation vs. UiPath Orchestrator Report
Automic Automation may have higher setup costs but offers robust capabilities, while UiPath Orchestrator provides a more affordable initial setup yet delivers efficient orchestration features.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation may have higher setup costs but offers robust capabilities, while UiPath Orchestrator provides a more affordable initial setup yet delivers efficient orchestration features.
Automic Automation Logo
Automic Automation Logo
Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow
3.0 out of 5
Automic Automation is favored for its pricing, support, and seamless integration across IT environments. In comparison, Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow offers cloud-centric features and flexible pricing, appealing to those seeking agility and cost efficiency in cloud-based operations.
Automic Automation has higher setup costs compared to Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow, making the latter a more cost-effective choice for businesses focused on budget management.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation has higher setup costs compared to Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow, making the latter a more cost-effective choice for businesses focused on budget management.
Automic Automation Logo
Automic Automation Logo
VMware Aria Automation Orchestrator
4.0 out of 5
Automic Automation is favored for its ease of deployment and strong customer support, appealing to organizations seeking simplicity. In comparison, VMware Aria Automation Orchestrator offers extensive features and robust integration options, making it attractive for businesses prioritizing comprehensive automation and cloud management despite higher initial setup costs.
Automic Automation has a higher setup cost compared to VMware Aria Automation Orchestrator, which offers a more cost-effective setup option.
View comparison
Pricing
Automic Automation has a higher setup cost compared to VMware Aria Automation Orchestrator, which offers a more cost-effective setup option.

Related categories

Workload Automation
Process Automation
Managed File Transfer (MFT)