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

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform 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

AutoSys Workload Automation
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
Workload Automation (7th)
Red Hat Ansible Automation ...
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
69
Ranking in other categories
Release Automation (3rd), Configuration Management (1st), Network Automation (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

AutoSys Workload Automation and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. AutoSys Workload Automation is designed for Workload Automation and holds a mindshare of 14.3%, down 18.8% compared to last year.
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, on the other hand, focuses on Configuration Management, holds 18.3% mindshare, up 18.4% since last year.
Workload Automation
Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

Antony Askew - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps us manage complex workloads, reduce our workload failure rates, and save us time
The visibility and control features are somewhat limited. This is a recognized weakness, but thee vendor is currently revamping the user interface to address it. While the current UI is a bit outdated, it's undergoing improvement. AutoSys Workload Automation has some areas for improvement, particularly in housekeeping and product maintenance. These tasks are currently quite manual and labor-intensive for our team. Additionally, the reporting and forecasting functionalities could be more robust. One area for improvement with AutoSys Workload Automation is that it comprises several distinct tools configured to work together. This necessitates familiarity with multiple tools for effective solution management. Consequently, it can sometimes lack a sense of cohesiveness as a unified solution.
Surya Chapagain - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to manage and simple to learn
We use Red Hat a lot. I open tickets for the Red Hat cases, however, with Ansible, I haven't opened any cases. My manager worked with them a bit. If we have a problem with some file and we need to get Red Hat to analyze the issue and the file is 100GBs, we'll have an issue since we need to provide a log file for them to analyze. If it is around 12GB or 13GB, we can easily upload it to the Red Hat portal. With more than 100GBs, it will fail. I heard it should cover up to 250GB for an upload, however, I find it fails. Therefore, Red Hat needs to provide a way to handle this.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"This solution has made my clients' workplaces a lot less labor-intensive."
"We get better reports than we use to have."
"CA Workload Automation AutoSys Edition is one of the most powerful schedulers that you have on the open systems, or going between Window servers; to be able to schedule and take advantage of the different powers that the automation has with it."
"It can run an object on our Windows systems or our Unix systems, and then send messages to the other system when they are complete."
"The web UI is beneficial and the granular security policies allow us to cover all of our audit requirements."
"We need to have things run in a very sequential order, so it is very useful that we can schedule the work flows."
"The actual scheduling of our jobs has helped us tremendously. Before it was all done manually, and we've totally automated the whole functionality, so there's no longer a case where somebody didn't run something."
"It is stable, it works, and it does what it is supposed to."
"The most valuable feature is that Ansible is agentless."
"The most useful features are the playbooks. We can develop our playbooks and simplify them doing something like a cross platform."
"The easy-to-read syntax for YAML files and the interoperability between modules are valuable."
"The Organizations feature, where I can give clear silos and hand them over to different teams, that's amazing; everybody says that it's their own Tower. It's like they have their own Tower out there."
"Ansible Tower provides a GUI, which is an enhancement, and a well-liked feature by operation teams."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its configuration management, drift management, workflow templates with the visual UI, and graphical workflow representation."
"The reason I like Ansible is, first, the coding of it is very straightforward, it's very human-readable. I'm also on a contract, and I can clearly iterate and bring people up to speed very quickly on writing a Playbook compared with writing up a Puppet manifest or a Salt script."
"There are so many models that I don't have to create one."
 

Cons

"The lack of documentation, that is an issue. When we do need to bring it down for maintenance, it is always a scary moment for us because we have never had it crash."
"The WCC could be improved."
"I am not sure whether it is our limitation or a tool limitation because we haven't yet explored it, but whenever we look for different types of reporting, we have some limitations in getting those. It could be because of the way we have set it up internally in our enterprise, but it would be helpful if we can customize the reporting features and some of the alerts that can go out. When we connect enterprise systems, each one looks for a different use case, and if we can get different types of reporting, it will be helpful."
"SQL server clustering is not supported."
"AutoSys Workload Automation could improve in the Linux environment. The previous versions of the AutoSys Workload Automation let you take the profile of the user that you were using to run the tasks that you're going to automate, but in the latest versions, you can't do that, you need to make more definitions and it's a little bit difficult. It was easier in the previous versions."
"It lacks support and integration with cloud computing platforms."
"We had a few issues, however, the issues were more on the infrastructure rather than with the application itself."
"​A better graphical user interface, because we have a lot of people using the client utility, and we want to get them away from that.​"
"It should support more integration with different products."
"What I'm trying to figure out, personally, is, when doing mass updates, how I can parallelize that a little bit better. It seems right now - and maybe, it's a shortcoming on my end - that I run through one set of servers, and then another set of servers, ad then another set of servers, but it seems like I could throw a lot of these checks out. Different types of servers, like web servers and DB servers, if I could parallelize that a little bit to make everything run a little bit more efficiently, that would help."
"The communication on it is not probably where it could be. We could use some real life examples where we could point customers to them and say, "This is what you are trying to do. If you follow these steps, it would at least get you started a bit quicker.""
"The tool should allow us to create infrastructure. It has everything when it comes to management, but it lacks the provisioning aspect."
"Documentation could be improved. Many times, if I'm looking for something, I have to Google it in a lot of places, then figure out what the best approach will be. There are some best practices documents, but they don't give you the information."
"The solution requires some Linux knowledge."
"One problem that I'm facing right now is the mismatch between the new version of Python and Ansible. Sometimes it's Python 2, and sometimes it's Python 3. When things get a bit dicey, I wish that Ansible would solve this issue by itself. I don't want to have to specify if it is Python 3 or version 2."
"For a couple of the API integrations, there has been a lack of documentation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CA pricing has been a problem, and not looked upon favorably here at all."
"The price of this solution is reasonable and there is an annual license required."
"I certainly think the pricing is worth the value."
"The pricing needs to be improved. Some of my client's complained that it was too expensive."
"We paid to use the solution monthly."
"People need to pay attention to how they use their ESP agents on the distributed platform. That's where some of the cost comes in, based on how many you need or how many you use."
"It is overpriced."
"The return on investment would be very high because doing things manually without this product would be extremely expensive."
"Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform is an affordable solution."
"The pricing is pretty standard."
"The pricing is okay."
"The cost is high, but it still works well."
"Ansible Tower is free. Until they lower the cost, we are holding off on purchasing the product."
"I don't see the pricing or licensing features, but from what I understand, it is fairly reasonable."
"We have to be mindful of how we use Ansible because of the licensing model. I am not saying that it is unfair or we do not find value in it. Because we are trying to automate so many different things, we have to be mindful of what we are doing and how we are doing it because we are trying to stay in compliance with it."
"You don't need to buy agents on servers or deploy expense management when using the solution, which affected our decision to go with it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
842,466 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
48%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
6%
Insurance Company
5%
Educational Organization
32%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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 AutoSys Workload Automation?
The most valuable aspects of AutoSys Workload Automation are its performance, scalability, and ease of getting started for new users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AutoSys Workload Automation?
The solution is costly. The pricing is based on the number of users, which for me, translates to approximately $120,000 to $130,000 for a license period of two to three years.
What is the difference between Red Hat Satellite and Ansible?
Red Hat Satellite has proven to be a worthwhile investment for me. Both its patch management and license management have been outstanding. If you have a large environment, patching systems is much ...
How does Ansible compare to Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager (SCCM)?
Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager takes knowledge and research to properly configure. The length of time that the set up will take depends on the kind of technical architecture that your org...
What do you like most about Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform?
The most valuable features of the solution are automation and patching.
 

Also Known As

CA Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation AE
Ansible
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Gaumont, Mercantil do Brasil, CCEE, Hanwha Life
HootSuite Media, Inc., Cloud Physics, Narrative, BinckBank
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Redwood Software, Broadcom and others in Workload Automation. Updated: March 2025.
842,466 professionals have used our research since 2012.