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

Automic Automation Intelligence [EOL] vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 22, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Automic Automation Intellig...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Control-M
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th), Workload Automation (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

MH
Useful multiple scheduler, centralized batch view, and reliable
There are approximately seven connectors for enterprises. This vendor doe snot has a lot of competition in the market. I recommend beginning with AI as it will provide us with a comprehensive understanding of your batches as a whole. If there are other participations or downstream processes involved, we can integrate them with AI, creating a centralized hub for your engineer batch, both downstream and upstream. I rate Automic Automation Intelligence an eight out of ten.
Pedro Fuentes - PeerSpot reviewer
Cost-effective, excellent support, and centralized access and control
They have a department that handles requests for enhancements. I talked to Control-M guys back in October or November when they had a gathering here in Atlanta. We talked about not being able to go back in history in Helix Control-M for more than two weeks. We submitted a request for enhancement. They told us that they are working on it, and they are thinking of expanding that to 30 days. We would like to see it expand to 90 days, but they are working on it. In Control-M, we were able to go back 180 days, but that was on-prem. The storage of that data was on our own servers. We know that storage is money, and we do not expect them to store that much of the data, but at least 30 to 60 days seem proper.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The Action Packs are a good feature."
"The most valuable feature of Automic Automation Intelligence is the ability to see all of the batches from one place. Additionally, there is a multiple scheduler that is useful."
"The tool's online manuals and documentation are good. Its user interface is user-friendly."
"Control-M can cross all platforms and offers integration for container and cloud solutions."
"The reporting is top-notch. I haven't found any other applications on the market that can replicate what Control-M offers. The alerting is very good, and I think their service monitoring is the best in the industry."
"There is a batch monitoring tool called Batch Impact Manager, which proactively warns when processing is behind and SLAs are in jeopardy of being missed."
"In our bank, all new applications need to be implemented with Control-M. We try to look for the best way to establish communication between both products. One of the new features for us is Application Integrator. It is a very interesting feature because it lets us integrate with those applications that are not included in Control-M. By using Application Integrator, we can easily integrate new technologies. With the help of Application Integrator, we recently integrated with Blue Prism, which is a robotic product. We could integrate such processes into Control-M. Now, we are working with Ansible, and we are putting Ansible automated processes into Control-M."
"Control-M provides us with a unified view, where we can easily define, orchestrate, and monitor all our application workflows and data pipelines. It also provides the ability to filter. So, if I don't want to see everything, I can also narrow it down or open ViewPoint. This is very important since we have thousands of jobs to monitor. If we did not have this ability, it would be very difficult to see what is going on."
"BIM is a good tool to monitor SLAs, and being a financial organization, this is a very good feature for us."
"We used Control-M's Python Client and cloud data service integrations with AWS and, as a feature, it was very customizable. It gave us a lot of flexibility for customizing whatever data maneuver we wanted to do within a pipeline."
"It is very easy to use. The HA feature is also very good."
 

Cons

"The solution could benefit by having more connectors and customized widgets. Additionally, a dashboard that people could use for videos would be helpful."
"The job reporting feature needs improvement."
"Integration of the solution could be improved."
"A lot of the areas of improvement revolve around Automation API because that area is constantly evolving. It is constantly changing, and it is constantly being updated. There are some bugs that are introduced from one version to the next. So, the regression testing doesn't seem to capture some of the bugs that have been fixed in prior versions, and those bugs are then reintroduced in later versions."
"Advanced File Transfer (AFT) has limitations that cause us to use a bit more licensing than we feel is appropriate."
"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."
"The reporting functionality needs a lot of work. We have faced problems with different versions where we run the right report, but it gives us blank entries. Then, when we run the same report again, it gives the correct data."
"They could enhance the product's data flow, job processing speed, and efficiency."
"Its architecture is old. AutoSys gives more flexibility."
"The stability of Control-M has Not been great. A big thing we've been trying to work on with BMC is observability. Modern applications should be observable and resilient, but we're finding that sometimes Control-M is not very resilient and many times Control-M is not very observable."
"The unifying features between Control-M for different platforms needs improvement. The scheduling options on the Control-M mainframe jobs are different than they are on our Linux server. There are a few differences here and there."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of Automic Automation Intelligence depends on the connectors used. For example, if you wanted to connect to Dell BMC, you would need a connector."
"Automic Automation Intelligence's licensing costs are expensive and can be yearly or monthly."
"Its pricing and licensing could be a little bit better. Based on my experience and discussions with other existing customers, everybody feels that the regular Managed File Transfer piece, not the enterprise one, is a little overpriced, especially for folks who already have licensed Advanced File Transfer. We understand that Advanced File Transfer is going away and is going to be the end of life, and there is some additional functionality built into MFT, but the additional functionality does not really correlate with the huge price increase over what we're paying for AFT already. This has actually driven a lot of people to look for alternative solutions."
"The product price is reasonable. I rate the pricing an eight."
"The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."
"The pricing of Control-M is reasonable."
"They are expensive. If we were a small company, it would be complicated because we have to have strong sales and operations to be able to afford a tool of this level. Being a large company, the cost-benefit is covered, but it is not within the level of cheap solutions."
"The price is right because of the licensing schema, which is based on nodes and processes. You purchase what you use, no more and no less, and you can grow with time."
"The annual licensing within BMC Control-M is on a per task basis. Three- and five-year contracts are also offered. The customer usually buys a bundle of tasks, e.g., 5,000 tasks, then my team configures Control-M for their usage."
"This is an expensive product compared to other solutions, although I think that it is a good one. We are in a good position with licensing, as we can run 10,000 jobs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
29%
Manufacturing Company
18%
Computer Software Company
13%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Automic Automation Intelligence?
The tool's online manuals and documentation are good. Its user interface is user-friendly.
What is your primary use case for Automic Automation Intelligence?
The product functions like any other scheduling tool, facilitating the execution of tasks in a customer's environment. Additionally, it supports FTP processes to various remote FTP servers without ...
How does Control-M compare with AutoSys Workload Automation?
Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and th...
What do you like most about Control-M?
First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more.
 

Also Known As

Terma Suite
Control M
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Redwood Software, Broadcom and others in Workload Automation. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.