No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Automic Automation vs Dollar Universe Workload Automation comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

JAMS
Sponsored
Ranking in Workload Automation
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Automic Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
104
Ranking in other categories
Business Orchestration and Automation Technologies (10th)
Dollar Universe Workload Au...
Ranking in Workload Automation
23rd
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of JAMS is 3.0%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automic Automation is 5.8%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Dollar Universe Workload Automation is 1.8%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Automic Automation5.8%
JAMS3.0%
Dollar Universe Workload Automation1.8%
Other89.4%
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

LV
Principal Data Base And Infrastructure Engineer at a outsourcing company with 501-1,000 employees
Automation has replaced nightly monitoring and delivers reliable, unified job scheduling
We have really enjoyed working with JAMS in terms of notifications, alerts, and streamlining. There used to be a process with Automate, which is another product from Fortra, but even before that, the other division of the company that we were merging with had a tool that was built in-house called a file handler or file distributor. It was an in-house developed tool, but it was not as streamlined or as efficient as JAMS is. We literally had to have a dedicated nighttime person monitoring. Although we are 24/7, the divisions of the company that we were using JAMS for have been small scale. While we have automated it, we have streamlined it in such a way that notifications go out and alerts go out, but if there is anything, then we get paged and alerted, and if anything needs to happen at midnight, we can wake up. On the other hand, with the tool I mentioned, the file handler and distributor, we used to have a dedicated nighttime person that had to be sitting and monitoring it to see when a file arrived, whether it met the conditions, and then execute the next particular job. By using JAMS, we have gained a lot more efficiencies in terms of all of those to streamline it, and there is no necessary need for having an overnight engineer just keeping an eye on all of this.
Peter Grundler - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant at Tricise
Helps to move away from manual tasks and offers wide platform support and web-based interface
Customers want to move away from manual monitoring and checking processes. Automating these processes helps in time-saving and reduces human error. When you automate business processes, it reduces mistakes. It eliminates the risk of manual errors such as typos. There is a 20% to 30% reduction in human error. It fulfills all the needs when it comes to visibility and control across various operating platforms. It is the perfect product for managing processes that span multiple operating platforms. Automic Automation has the widest platform support compared to other products, such as Control-M, Tivoli from IBM, or Stonebranch. It definitely helps with compliance processes. We have had a lot of customers for two years with a focus on compliance, and it works. They were successful. Due to the fact that our customers can automate a lot of things, it reduces operating costs. It is hard to give a number because the savings are different for each customer. If a customer never had any automation, there could be about 80% savings after implementing Automic Automation, whereas for a customer who already has automated tasks, the difference will be less by adding Automic Automation. They might see 5% to 10% more savings. Automic Automation helps improve our ability to meet SLAs. In the recent versions, SLA management has been integrated, which previously was an external component. Because a lot of customers used it and asked Broadcom to implement SLA management into the workload engine, Broadcom included it. We see more and more customers running their SLA management via the Automic Automation product.
MH
Senior Presales Engineer at a computer software company with 51-200 employees
Highly stable, flexible pricing, and simple setup
As a new customer, you have the opportunity to explore the upcoming new versions of Dollar Universe Workload Automation which are set to bring about many changes and introduce exciting new features to make your life easier. However, if you are a new customer and starting from scratch, I would recommend choosing Automic instead. On the other hand, if you are an existing customer with valuable skills and knowledge of Dollar Universe, and you are content with the current features and functionalities, then it may be more beneficial for you to stick with a higher version of Dollar Universe Workload Automation. I rate Dollar Universe Workload Automation an eight out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ability to sequence jobs is excellent; it means we don't have to schedule them individually, and if one fails, it doesn't unwind the entire workflow."
"JAMS has helped save IT staff time by automating tasks previously performed with scripts, and its scheduling feature has been particularly useful."
"JAMS offers diverse scheduling capabilities for any kind of job, including Linux, PowerShell scripts, and SQL, enabling automation of jobs, which has proven beautiful after three years of usage."
"It's worth its weight in gold and we cannot get rid of it now."
"It has definitely drastically improved our capabilities to scale our automation. Before JAMS, there were a lot of manual processes. We had a couple of operators who spent all day doing that. A lot of the time with human intervention and human processes, it is as good as the person who may be following a procedure and human error is a big problem."
"Fortra's JAMS helped us centralize job management across our platforms and applications. This is critical because we schedule tasks across multiple applications and operating systems, using triggers and start dates to coordinate their execution."
"The product is easy to use."
"I didn't know about JAMS because I don't have a person with any challenges with the purchase administration. The feature or the user interface is user-friendly because of the readable icons or very descriptive icons. Though I'm a beginning user of JAMS, I had no issues using it."
"Being able to script, create something I want the software to do for a specific job. This allows me to do that. Very powerful."
"It improves the visibility of what is going on on the system. If I have a problem, it is easy to identify, understand dependencies, and identifying the root causes than just running through scripts and searching through applications or servers."
"We do not have different automated silos, we have one view for our operators, which are doing things 24/7, and need just one interface, not multiple ones."
"ONE Automation has centralized tools, it is really strong and really easy to use ONE Automation."
"The most valuable features are the predefined templates for application-specific jobs and the access for different users."
"The Zero Upgrade feature is the most valuable."
"It is easy to set up and use. The whole system is complete."
"We use it to automate our business."
"The most valuable features of Dollar Universe Workload Automation are stability and scalability."
"The solution is easy to use and is one of its most valuable features...I rate its scalability a nine out of ten."
"Some of the automation options are quite good."
"We have found the architecture and the features in the architecture to be quite good."
 

Cons

"For the most part, JAMS is very stable. Occasionally, if you leave multiple windows open over a period of time, it is necessary to end that task and restart."
"The JAMS automation code isn't so clean."
"For scalability, I would rate it as seven because when we have a huge volume, sometimes the tool is not so responsive."
"There could be a better simulation for banning the termination. You have to simulate every one of the processes in order to have an idea for better planning. This kind of simulation is broken and needs improvement."
"The client is horrible. Every time JAMS puts out a survey on what they can improve, I always say, "The client: When you are setting up jobs, it is quite horrible." The response has been, "Well, we are just using the Windows foundation," and I am like, "Why isn't it only your product?" We can get around it now that we know its quirks, but it is not the most user-friendly of tools out there. The UI is completely unintuitive. We had to go and open up a support ticket with JAMS just to get something back. It is not user-friendly at all."
"The ACL or access permission area needs to be improved. When it comes to defining and providing security permissions, it's a bit confusing if you are new to JAMS. JAMS needs to improve the features for security access or permissions."
"There could be a better simulation for banning the termination. You have to simulate every one of the processes in order to have an idea for better planning. This kind of simulation is broken and needs improvement."
"As an admin, I would like to have a web-based GUI instead of a client application that we have to install on our PCs."
"This solution's out-of-box automation sets could be improved. They could be industry standardized out-of-box, or even runbook automation processes could be useful—just some plug-and-play automation processes out-of-box. It has many integration capabilities, from APIs to databases, but if the customer sees some out-of-box automation processes in it, it could be useful."
"Automic's database structure is not intuitive. When upgrading, the system breaks down frequently and we require a lot of support."
"I'm not sure what data they use to make time estimates. However, most of the time it is not accurate. It's either way too long or way too short."
"I hope in the next release that they will solve all the bugs which they have found in development."
"The frustration that we have probably had in the past is where CA tools run for a period of time, then they get deprecated, and you have to build a new one."
"The new user interface AWI could improve. It is quite easy to use and work around, but it has lost some of the functionality that we used to have in our Vim client user interface."
"There are opportunities where things could be documented a little bit better."
"It is a bit of a problem, because they like to do email ping-pong via their web page."
"The interface of Dollar Universe Workload Automation could improve to something more modern. Additionally, Kubernetes is not an option to use in"
"We have a lot of issues with the product and its workflow capabilities."
"There are some features that don't work as expected."
"The solution needs stability improvement when connecting to the script or trying to find something. It takes a few seconds to perform the function or needs a complete reorganization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing of JAMS has not been an issue for us, as it has allowed us to save time."
"JAMS is priced competitively compared to similar solutions and offers flexible licensing options to cater to user needs."
"The product is reasonably priced, and we don't have any add-ons."
"Take advantage of its scalability. You can start small. The initial cost is very reasonable. Once you have started picking up the tool and adopting it, then you can scale up from there and buy more agents."
"The licensing model for JAMS is straightforward and based on the number of agents, not the number of jobs you run. It's cheap and fairly simple."
"It was $10,000 for the first year. Then, there is a maintenance cost for licensing every year that we get billed $5,000 for every year."
"In the end, you'll find that it's really worth the price. There is some sticker shock, but it's worth every dime."
"I haven't been involved in the financial side for several years, but we buy one host and unlimited agents, and we get a reasonable price for that. We're happy with the amount we pay and the scalability it provides."
"We receive time efficiency from this product."
"Certain licenses can be a bit expensive. The PeopleSoft agents, in particular, are a bit pricey."
"This is a support system for us, not our core business, so we purchased this product inexpensively."
"We came to a very good deal, but it took us three years to finalize."
"We have received a lot of time and cost efficiencies from using the product."
"This solution is pretty well-priced."
"Broadcom has recently changed its licensing model. I do not deal with pricing, but from what I heard from customers is that due to the increased pricing, some of them are thinking of reducing tasks in Automic to have fewer executions. Others are thinking of replacing Automic Automation."
"The cost of arrays is high. If you want to buy an array for an application, and see value from it, you need about half a million dollars. That is too expensive."
"The price of Dollar Universe Workload Automation is comparable to other solutions on the market. There can be discounts available depending on the business."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
892,776 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Construction Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise10
Large Enterprise20
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business19
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise67
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JAMS?
My thoughts on the pricing of JAMS are that I won't say it is cheap, but it is cost-efficient, and that should be acc...
What needs improvement with JAMS?
An area that has room for improvement is related to the AWS RDS and database part, where they said that is in progres...
What is your primary use case for JAMS?
My use case is in batch scheduling and managing the batch jobs.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Automic Workload Automation?
The pricing was client-wise, but they are changing it to execution-wise pricing. So, we are in negotiation.
What needs improvement with Automic Workload Automation?
Automic Automation has some disadvantages; it is more simplified, and sometimes it can be complicated. The technical ...
What is your primary use case for Automic Workload Automation?
I have been dealing with Automic Automation for probably around ten years. I have been both a partner with Automic, w...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
Automic Dollar Universe
CA Automic Dollar Universe
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Teradata, Arconic, General Dynamics, Yum!, CVS Health, Comcast, Ghiradelli, & Boston’s Children’s Hospital
ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
TCS Bancs, Gaumont, Bank Turkey
Find out what your peers are saying about Automic Automation vs. Dollar Universe Workload Automation and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
892,776 professionals have used our research since 2012.