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
44
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 (13th)
Dollar Universe Workload Au...
Ranking in Workload Automation
25th
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 June 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of JAMS is 3.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Automic Automation is 5.5%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Dollar Universe Workload Automation is 1.7%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Automic Automation5.5%
JAMS3.0%
Dollar Universe Workload Automation1.7%
Other89.8%
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 most valuable feature is the easily accessible data in the database because we run a lot of SQL scripting against the database."
"The planning capabilities are most valuable."
"JAMS saves us on the order of thousands of hours per year."
"JAMS positively impacts my organization because it helps make it easier to manage JD Edwards scheduled jobs and fills the gap that the JD Edwards application has with scheduling, resolving a lot of those issues."
"The overall product is fantastic. I love it. It has been a fantastic, solid product. If I have one tiny bit of a problem with it, the support team gets in touch with me right away. I don't know if I've had another service that has been as fantastic as the JAMS support team."
"It's worth its weight in gold and we cannot get rid of it now."
"The interface is good, and it's very easy to define and create jobs. If a job is not running or there is an error, the solution will send an email. That's all very good and very useful."
"The fact that we no longer need to use Excel spreadsheets is huge."
"As far as our schedules, if we have problems, we can create our own process in the automation, which is good."
"It is flexible. We can do additional scripting in Automic script, in combination with JSL language."
"Our customers' environments are not manageable without Automic."
"It integrates well with the CICD pipeline."
"It's a scheduling tool on steroids; we can have a job run at certain times, and if it fails, reset it a number of times and then send an e-mail, send e-mails on any type of event, and do calendar creation to schedule things on certain days, year-end stuff, and period end; it's endless, really."
"It has its own object-oriented scripting language and you can reload your object in many different places."
"Allowed us to almost fully automate our batch schedule and to provide our Operations team with a single interface for monitoring batch and automated system processes."
"The stability is very good, we have not had any crashes or downtime with it in our testing, we are very happy with it and it runs pretty fast."
"We have found the architecture and the features in the architecture to be quite good."
"The most valuable features of Dollar Universe Workload Automation are stability and scalability."
"Some of the automation options are quite good."
"The solution is easy to use and is one of its most valuable features...I rate its scalability a nine out of ten."
 

Cons

"I want JAMS to implement a global search function."
"The UI could be better. There were some things that were not quite intuitive, such as the search tool. When we tried to search for jobs, we had to clear the entire search and then go in and enter the new search query. That's something that wasn't intuitive for a new user."
"JAMS lacks source control features. Our previous solution had job control language, but JAMS doesn't. When migrating between versions, JAMS doesn't migrate all the data, like job change history, etc. Also, the scheduler doesn't have a way to make jobs invisible, so you can temporarily turn a job off if you decide not to run it today."
"For scalability, I would rate it as seven because when we have a huge volume, sometimes the tool is not so responsive."
"The JAMS automation code isn't so clean."
"I would like a simple web interface that I could give to my team to go in and kill jobs or see why jobs died so that we don't have to drill down deeper into the application and know everything about it. It would be good to have a really clean web engine that would say here are the jobs running. We can then click to see the time running and whether any of them fails and other similar things. I know they have one, but it's not very simplistic."
"The only thing that they could improve on is the fact that they don't have a browser version of JAMS. They've got all the bits and pieces there if you want to build your own web version of it. It does come with a web client, but it's pretty clunky. They could improve on that."
"The monitoring of the JAMS product and its performance is an area of concern for me."
"The forecast and long-term planning could be made a little better when you work with it in the future."
"The interface could be made more user-friendly in terms of job creation and scheduling, especially when doing bulk job creation."
"The manage file transfer area could be better."
"That's probably one of our biggest pain points right now. When we go to a new version, the agents have to all be upgraded."
"The search is sometimes a little bit slow."
"It does not have the same functions as the old version, which makes our developers angry because they must work with this tool."
"Anything related to the enhancement process is poor at best and should be more transparent. They should consider an open-source model where users can more easily see requests."
"There were many bugs in the last version."
"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."
"The interface of Dollar Universe Workload Automation could improve to something more modern. Additionally, Kubernetes is not an option to use in"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There are no additional costs other than the license for Fortra's JAMS which is affordable."
"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."
"The pricing is very fair. We have seen very minimal to no price increases over the years. We are not banging down the door of support all the time either. I would imagine if we were a company that submitted a dozen support tickets a week for the last nine years, then it might be a little different because we would be eating up everybody's time. However, for what we get out of it, the pricing is extremely fair. Back when we were originally looking and brought in JAMS, we were looking at a couple of the other competitive products that were in this space, but the pricing from JAMS was far and away better than what the other competitors could offer for the same functionality."
"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 product is reasonably priced, and we don't have any add-ons."
"JAMS is close to the lower end of the pricing models for enterprise scheduling solutions. They are much cheaper than Control-M, as well as some other products that I've used. I also don't know of another solution where you can actually get true, unlimited licensing, where you can have as many instances and as many agents as you want."
"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."
"The product is reasonably priced, and we don't have any add-ons."
"Automatic is heavily integrated in our organization. The cost to change would be a huge factor for us, and we have not found any other product that is better out there."
"This solution is pretty well-priced."
"The cost of the solution depends on the number of systems that are being orchestrated."
"This is a support system for us, not our core business, so we purchased this product inexpensively."
"There are a lot of new features, but we do not use them because they are too expensive. The price point could be less."
"Initially, the pricing was competitive but consistently, year over year, its pricing has become more erratic. It increases to the point where even with the positives, it starts to become a longer-term question about how it will fit into the environment."
"We have increased efficiency with this application."
"Its price is way up there with BMC. It is a little bit on the expensive side."
"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.
896,942 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Retailer
8%
Construction Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise14
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 experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing was acceptable. I have gone with JAMS licen...
What needs improvement with JAMS?
I am fine with what JAMS offers and have nothing to suggest for improvement. JAMS' code-driven automation is not wide...
What is your primary use case for JAMS?
My main use case for JAMS is scheduling, which is the primary usage. I am mainly using JAMS for scheduling various jo...
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.
896,942 professionals have used our research since 2012.