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

Automic Automation vs HCL Workload Automation comparison

 

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

Automic Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
2nd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
103
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
HCL Workload Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Automic Automation is 7.1%, up from 6.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of HCL Workload Automation is 2.4%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Peter Grundler - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
reviewer1418508 - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to set up, good support, and helps to decrease project costs
With the mainframe environment that we have, it is more similar to the HCL migration, or the workload scheduler. We also like the CWHC utilities; they are more current and under the umbrella of HCL. It reduces project risks. Easy to set up, it doesn't require a lot. You can start working immediately. Migration is increased while it decreases the cost of the project.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"There are a lot of features which help us get a stable application. It is easy to have a stable production line, because this app supports us very well."
"Since we bought it, we have not had any big issues. We are satisfied with it. We are able to run multiple jobs. We can build and run complicated jobs. There are no issues."
"Without automation, it would be nearly impossible to do all the jobs that we are doing."
"Stability has been great. My team, we call ourselves "the invisibles" because things run so well that sometimes you almost feel like you have to try to break something to actually get acknowledged."
"The most valuable features are its robustness, it's highly scalable, and it's easy to implement."
"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."
"The scheduling feature is very user-friendly."
"The product has benefited our organization. It saves time and manpower."
"Easy to set up, it doesn't require a lot."
 

Cons

"The search is sometimes a little bit slow."
"We can't migrate the users from one master to another master or product to product. We have to do it manually."
"A little less button clicking, in the navigation of the tool itself would also help. There is a lot out there, and I understand that's what keeps the tool robust. It keeps our options open, but it's a bit click-y sometimes. To get where you need to go, you have to go through 10 levels."
"ServiceNow creates problems with the Automic entry of the connector, so the stability could be a little bit better with this product."
"We would also like improved SLR monitoring. There are SLR objects, but I can't define an SLR object plus one, or end days. I can only do it for one day. As we are time shifting to another day, it is not possible. This should be improved."
"Automic's database structure is not intuitive. When upgrading, the system breaks down frequently and we require a lot of support."
"Integration with the cloud is an area for improvement. They have to make it somehow fit or usable for cloud use cases. Right now, it works great for our on-prem data center, but they have to come up with a very good reason why people should be using it in the cloud."
"Content of file transfers cannot be searched by the system, but has to be done by the user interface. This is not good, as it has been erased often."
"The interface needs some improvements."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We receive time efficiency from this product."
"The pricing was client-wise, but they are changing it to execution-wise pricing. So, we are in negotiation."
"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."
"Automic Automation's pricing is excellent, especially in comparison to similar solutions."
"Its price is way up there with BMC. It is a little bit on the expensive side."
"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."
"The pricing of Automic Automation varies depending on the specific contract terms."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Insurance Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Insurance Company
11%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 was client-wise, but they are changing it to execution-wise pricing. So, we are in negotiation.
What needs improvement with Automic Workload Automation?
They could improve by providing more control features for schedules. For example, we can hold a job, and then it could stop the job in the actual end application. They could improve such capabilities.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Automic Dollar Universe
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, Redwood Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: April 2025.
848,716 professionals have used our research since 2012.