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

Automic Automation vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 24, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

Automic Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
101
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Control-M
Ranking in Workload Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
119
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Automic Automation is 7.2%, up from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 26.7%, up from 26.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

AnkitSrivastava - PeerSpot reviewer
Good automation, handles complex jobs, and is easy to manage
We do use the solution for business-critical processes. We have a lot of complex jobs. They are using multiple databases to connect to one master. We execute jobs on multiple databases. I'm currently working with Broadcom and have created a few alert mechanisms for bug alerts. When we find bugs and report them, we can get hard fixes applied. The solution's ability to handle large volumes of data is very good. I've been happy with it. We can improve so many things by 20% or more. It's a very costly product, and the client who is paying for it needs to see results, and so far, they are. The GUI interface is very good. It's user-friendly, even for new users. Within a few days, they can learn the solution. It's easy to learn and not overly complex. In one console, we can run multiple executions and manage the load balancer, et cetera. It's very easy now to manage complex workflows using this product. We can maximize agent performance. We can execute a large number of jobs. Compared to other tools, it's much more efficient. The visibility and control is excellent. The predictive modeling provided by AI is very good. We can implement fixes automatically as well. Its predictive modeling has been very critical. Jobs are executing on this and that is very important. Even if the master is down for an hour, the company can lose millions of dollars, so having that predictability is key to managing downtime in advance. We can reduce our job workload failure rates across multiple cloud environments. For example, if we have servers and we are installing agents in the master, we can create agents on multiple servers and we can execute jobs on both agents at one time. That way, if one server goes down, there is no disruption. The jobs will execute on the second agent - and no human interface is required for the task. We've been able to save time. Previously, we were dependent upon so many team members, and it would take one week to create one console or one tool. However, now, within three or four hours, we are creating one master and agents. We save six days. It's comprehensive - but we do have an audit feature. We have a separate audit team and in the tool itself, we have audit automation so we can run audits on a quarterly basis. Sometimes we have big queries and the data is massive and difficult to manage. However, with this product, we can schedule a job and, in three months, we can get a report directly without wasting time. It's safer in terms of audit requirements. With the tool, we've been able to save on operational costs. With other tools, we had difficulty with management, and there were so many dependencies on so many teams. With one console, we can create multiple agents that run on Oracle and have one point of control with multiple features. We can run the solution on both cloud and on-prem environments. We're 90% cloud currently. However, 10% is still left on-prem. Our plan is to move 100% to the cloud.
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 best feature is its wide platform support and the user interface. It offers a consistent user experience regardless of whether you are implementing a job on a mainframe, SAP platform, or other machines."
"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."
"We have everything in one system."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the scheduler."
"It's easy to use. When you schedule jobs, if you can speak English you can schedule them easily and correctly. Also, there's a lot of flexibility because the product allows you to do many tasks, in multiple ways, so you can choose the way that works best for your environment."
"You can create very fine, granular workflows with a lot of possibilities. It gives you the possibility to do things in many ways."
"We do not have to use a broad variety of agents to connect to different types of systems."
"Being able to script, create something I want the software to do for a specific job. This allows me to do that. Very powerful."
"The most valuable features of Control-M are automation and orchestration. It allows a different schedule, and we can manage thousands of jobs. It ensures we can complete them on time accurately. This automation reduces our manual intervention, significantly reducing error."
"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."
"We have a better picture of our auditability. When someone comes to us, and asks for sources, "How did the deltas occur?" We can provide answers quickly, or at least quicker than what we used to. We are actually sure of the information that we provide, where before it was like, "Hmm, I think it comes from over there. Let me double check, but it gets really convoluted over here and I think that is where it comes from." Now, if it is within the Control-M environment, it has a straightforward answer that we can provide with confidence."
"It integrates seamlessly with other tools within our ecosystem."
"We can set up automated email notifications to the programmers or the whole team for a particular job. It helps save time because we're not consistently looking at the job to see if it has ended or failed."
"The ability to integrate file transfers has been instrumental in allowing us to accomplish the things we need with Control-M. In our industry, we take a lot of data and either push it down to the stores or retail grocery stores. We take files and push them down to the stores or pull files and information from the stores and bring it back to corporate. So, it's two-way communication with file transfers. One of the bigger things that we do with Control-M is scheduling data moves and moving data from one location to another."
"We are now able to deliver data to our data warehouses and dashboards promptly."
"We can tie together all the workloads across the estate and make the whole process reactive to events."
 

Cons

"The manage file transfer area could be better. The file transfer area needs improvement. Other products like Control-M have some good features in this area."
"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."
"The versioning and support for the lifecycle of Automic's developed solution is what we were missing. However, this is coming in version 12.2, so I am looking forward to seeing how it works."
"Our recent experience with technical support has not been good, because it took a couple of months to get feedback. Traces and reports were sent, but were not analyzed for at least two months before providing feedback, and they did not give the right traces. This took two months to find out, so that was not too good."
"After the merger, it is getting more American. Now, they do not have support in French and have limited German documentation. This is a critical problem for companies who have older generations who did not have English in school."
"I would like to see features from "Prompt" sets in read Masks."
"We can't migrate the users from one master to another master or product to product. We have to do it manually."
"We would like some advantages, which we had with the Java UI, with the automation engine."
"I would like to see automatic license management. And probably more importantly, some kind of machine learning to help identify the optimum automation path."
"Its installation can be better. Currently, we have to install it manually. The file transfer feature can also be improved. It is not very easy to transfer a file from business to business. In terms of new features, they can include new technologies. It can have API integration."
"Its operations and infrastructure can be improved."
"Finding documentation on the website can be a bit confusing."
"They really need to work on improving the web interface, as there are still a lot of bugs... In general, they need to do a lot of work on shoring up their testing and quality assurance. A lot of bugs seem to make it into the product."
"A smartphone interface would be welcome."
"It can definitely expand promotions, so that a single job can be moved. Currently you can only promote a job by promoting the entire table."
"A developer sandbox could be very helpful to try out new features or experience them."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We came to a very good deal, but it took us three years to finalize."
"Automic Automation's pricing is excellent, especially in comparison to similar solutions."
"We receive time efficiency from this product."
"I'm not sure about licensing costs, but I know the base price is about $3,000, and you can get some kind of discount per node."
"There are different licensing fees for cases where high availability is important."
"It costs too much. That's why we are now looking at other products."
"Every time there is a task which must be repeated, the solution can reduce costs."
"They have increased the license price a little bit. It is more than what we expected about two years ago. So, there could be some surprises when it comes to pricing."
"We have a license till 2024. We are good and satisfied with it."
"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."
"Its cost is a little bit higher than other solutions such as AutoSys or DAC. For the demo, there were some plans, such as start plan, scale plan, etc. Pricing was based on the plan."
"The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."
"Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more."
"This is an area where it is a little difficult to work with BMC. They want to do licenses by job, which is what we have. For example, the simplest is to license by job, but they can also license by nodes. While the licensing is simple to use, it might not be the correct licensing model for the customer. It is okay because we want to license by job, which is something measurable. At the end of the day, licensing by job is the most important."
"In our environment, pricing depends on the total number of maximum jobs that can run, which is fine. Therefore, if the number of jobs increases, then the licensing fees will increase."
"One of the restrictions that we had was with some of the licensing, and not having any insight on the financials part of the product. I don't know what the licensing on the product is, but we don't have an unlimited enterprise license. So, there might be a limitation on either the cost of the licensing or the number of seats."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Automic Workload Automation?
It is easy to manage complex workloads and use electronic workflow automation.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Automic Workload Automation?
The pricing model for Automic has changed from a host-based licensing model to one based on successful execution. I still prefer the earlier licensing model, but I understand that it was likely cha...
What needs improvement with Automic Workload Automation?
There are certain areas in Automic that need improvement, such as the complexity of workflow dependencies. When you have workflows within workflows, it can become complicated. The existing options ...
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

Automic Dollar Universe
Control M
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Find out what your peers are saying about Automic Automation vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.