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

BizTalk Server vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

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

BizTalk Server
Ranking in Process Automation
15th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Business-to-Business Middleware (8th)
Control-M
Ranking in Process Automation
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
118
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th), Workload Automation (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of BizTalk Server is 0.9%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 4.7%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Srinidhi S - PeerSpot reviewer
For production environments, messages are easily stored within the MessageBox database and offers multiple deployment methods
Some room for improvement means... it's legacy. It's an on-premises system, requiring physical servers for deployment. This is different from Azure; you don't need any servers with Azure. If you have a subscription, you can do whatever you want. There are unit restrictions based on the environment (like non-production vs. production) in BizTalk. You need physical servers and databases. In Azure, those are not required – it's all in the cloud. Now, we have the option of integrating accounts and the On-Premises Data Gateway to connect on-premises BizTalk with Azure. But the trend is moving towards Azure. Not everyone wants a hybrid model. Companies are still going with hybrid scenarios, but they want both BizTalk and Azure. See, whatever you can do in BizTalk, you cannot do the same things the same way in Azure. One example is tracking. In BizTalk, especially for production environments, messages are easily stored within the MessageBox database. Support can assist in retrieving them directly. It's not as easy to track in Azure – everyone can potentially access it, and even reprocessing is different. Logic Apps have a preview mode. If a Logic App is stuck at a particular action, you can resubmit from there. Microsoft is still making improvements – I don't know when they'll have general availability for these features. However, tracking and message storage are more complex in Azure. We have to use Azure Blob storage for archiving, whereas in BizTalk, it's a built-in feature of the MessageBox DB. If you need to debug at any point, you can do so easily in BizTalk. This is one aspect influenced by the on-premises nature of BizTalk. Since everything is moving to the cloud, Microsoft will also end support for BizTalk Server 2030 – there won't be any further support. I don't think they'll release any new versions. 2020 was the last, and it's been four years. After the end of support, I think companies currently using BizTalk will move to Azure or another cloud-based integration technology.
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

"Compared to the current solutions I use, like Azure Logic Apps and other cloud services, BizTalk was far better and more reliable."
"The tool's most valuable feature is its integration with the banks. Its messaging and routing capabilities are good."
"We can handle a large number of messages without any issues, ensuring that everything runs smoothly."
"The most valuable feature is its reliability and stability. The first version of BizTalk was released in 2000, and many companies still use it. It was stable until 2013 when we had support."
"The most valuable feature of BizTalk Server is that it will turn XML into flexible transactions."
"The AS2 communication protocol is one of the most advanced processes."
"Essentially, you can do whatever you like with these systems, and you do not have to take care about the scaling because if one server is overloaded, it just forwards the message to the next server, even if it were designated to a specific server. It weeds out the messages according to the load. If you want to scale it, you just add new servers."
"BIzTalk's integration with Visual Studio is the most valuable feature of this product."
"As soon as you have an issue, a ticket is created and the tech support is quite responsive."
"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."
"Control-M can cross all platforms and offers integration for container and cloud solutions."
"It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic."
"The most valuable features are the GUI console, stability, and workflow."
"The unified view where you can define, orchestrate, and monitor applications, workflows, and data pipelines is important because we have more than one team working on Control-M. We have a support team, a job-creation team, and a SAP team. We can all work together on it. It avoids anyone from working on his part and not using the latest modifications."
"In the client, it provides a unified view for me. I can alter the view that I want to see jobs and conditions. This is nice to have. The fact that you can see everything in one space is very important, especially these days where everything is about data and monitoring as well as because we are working from home on a global basis. So, I can monitor jobs in real-time, along with any failures or anything that might be stuck. The real-time monitoring and the ability to see everything in one place is important for us because we operate 24/7."
"Before Control-M, we didn't have a centralized view and could not view what happened in the past to determine what will happen in the future. The Gantt view that we have in Control-M is like a project view. It is nice because we sometimes have some application maintenance that we need to do. So, in a single console, we can hold the jobs for the next hour or two. We can release that job when it is finished. This is a really nice feature that we didn't have before. It is something really simple, but we didn't previously have a console where we could say, "For the next two hours, what are the jobs that we will run? And, hold these jobs not to run." This is really important."
 

Cons

"It's a complex product because you have many degrees of freedom to connect different parts together. Whether it's sensible or not, is up to you, but the machine does allow it. But because of the vast degrees of freedom, it's complex."
"BizTalk is in the past, Microsoft is not going to evolve it any further or add any new features."
"The product's deployment can be quicker"
"BizTalk Server is an outdated legacy system that does not support messaging."
"The product could be improved in monitoring, managing, and support functionalities."
"Updating things in BizTalk is a headache."
"The deployment could be simplified."
"BizTalk lacks native cloud support. BizTalk doesn't offer in-built support for cloud. We need to use third-party adapters to connect it to cloud services."
"But for some issues, BMC will suggest to upgrade to new version which will not be feasible to standards of the organisation. Hence some work around should be shown to run the business until new version was upgraded."
"The performance could be better. Control-M Enterprise Manager tends to slow the system down even on a server with a six-core processor and 32 gigabytes RAM. The console is Java-based, so maybe OpenJDK 16 or 17 would be a performance improvement."
"There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly."
"A smartphone interface would be welcome."
"A lot of businesses are using ServiceNow, which is another tool. I would like there to be some integration with ServiceNow or other third-party tools as well as have easily available integrations. Right now, we need to write scripts. Apart from that, if there were some integrations with an ITSM tool, then that would be good. Because at the end of the day, most of our clients are using different ITSM tools. I know that BMC Remedy is easy to integrate with Control-M. However, if there was availability for Jira as well as other ITSM and DevOps tools, that would be a good improvement."
"The MFT applications should have more functionality and flexibility within that tool. Having more flexibility with that tool for handling the one to many or many to one concept. Like being able to take data from one source and push it to many locations or pull data from many locations and bring it back into a single source. That's why we still use our TPS program for the file transfers just because we don't have some of those capabilities available to us within MFT."
"Whenever I pull an S4HANA job to the Helix Control-M tool, it pulls it naturally with all the steps. A job can have several steps, and in this case, it is very easy to control the steps taken. However, in the case of the SaaS IBP tool, it can pull the job but cannot identify the steps. So, when I want to take an action in a step, I have to split the job."
"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"BizTalk Server is not freeware. There's a significant licensing cost involved. Be sure you will actually utilize its features fully."
"BizTalk Server is cheap. I would rate its pricing a two out of five."
"It was not cheap, but it was affordable."
"The solution is expensive."
"The cost will depend on the client's requirements."
"Based on the knowledge, it is relatively cheaper than Azure Identity Services and cloud services in general."
"The annual licensing within BMC Control-M is on a per task basis. Three- and five-year contracts are also offered. The customer usually buys a bundle of tasks, e.g., 5,000 tasks, then my team configures Control-M for their usage."
"We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost."
"You're going to spend a lot of money upfront, but the benefits you're going to get out of it are going to quickly pay for it."
"BMC does NOT have a great licensing model from my perspective."
"The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take."
"As we increase the number of tasks or jobs on the system, there are concerns about cost."
"We have a license till 2024. We are good and satisfied with it."
"Pricing varies depending on which components and modules you are using."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Retailer
6%
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 BizTalk Server?
The tool's most valuable feature is its integration with the banks. Its messaging and routing capabilities are good.
What needs improvement with BizTalk Server?
BizTalk is deployed on-premise. Deployment methodologies are vast in the cloud area. Whereas, if we want to update even a single thing on BizTalk, we need to take the DLL, put it in the system, and...
What advice do you have for others considering BizTalk Server?
When I started my career with BizTalk, people told me the vendor would sunset BizTalk Server, but it didn't happen. Higher versions are still being released. The product will not face the sunset. A...
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

No data available
Control M
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Centrebet, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, QualCare, Wªrth Handelsges.m.b.H, DTEK, Allscripts, United BioSource, Hogg Robinson
CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Find out what your peers are saying about BizTalk Server vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.