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

BMC Compuware ISPW vs Endevor comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 12, 2025

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

BMC Compuware ISPW
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Endevor
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
45
Ranking in other categories
Mainframe Application Development (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of BMC Compuware ISPW is 28.5%, down from 31.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Endevor is 34.0%, up from 34.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

BM
Tracks code during the change process so that more than one group could have code checked out for change. ISPW provides this tracking info real time helping move toward a more Agile environment.
One of the features that the developers like is that they can retrieve what they need with ISPW. They don't have to go through a process or request something be done by another team. They can get the programs they need, compile them, retrieve the JCL and alter the JCL if they need to, and put these programs wherever they need to go for their testing. They can promote all the way through to the production step. I know that might make a lot of companies nervous when we talk about the fact that developers can promote to production. What that means is the developers promote the code to the point of being ready to be released into production. The release step is still controlled using your current approval process. This gives the development staff a lot more control over what they're doing, and it dovetails nicely into an Agile process. ISPW is really great at giving the developers access to all of the components all the way through the process. The control of actually putting code into production is more about the "when" and not the "how." In most companies, your change-control coordinators or business analysts, or managers that release code into production environment, will still do that last step. That's all controllable and secure at different levels. But it really gives the development staff a way to get everything where it needs to be, staged-up and ready to be released so that they can go work on something else. And the management of that movement into production is still maintained through whatever level you choose.
Efrén Yanez - PeerSpot reviewer
Good analysis and integrations with helpful automation
If I had to comment on an area of ​​improvement or something new in the next or future version, I would like to see AI-assisted coding and impact analysis for mainframes. It is actually a fairly complete product. It is robust with a solid history and is always growing in functionality. It has a high level of maturity, which benefits the users and the administrators. This tool, with its group of options, facilitates the integration with other business processes, which allows you to take advantage of other solutions by incorporating automatic functions.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The visual ability to see potential downstream impacts to changes being made assists our developers in understanding the impact associated with their change."
"We had parallel development before, but the way ISPW implements it is better. It has more control and oversight of the process, whereas before, it was like the Wild West. Everybody could have their own package with their own version of the component in it... ISPW is constantly aware of it. It notifies when someone else is using or has a different version of that component."
"It does our CICS NEWCOPYs and our Db2 binds for us, whereas before, that was a manual process. It takes a lot of the workload off of the operations folks and off the DBAs."
"One of the features that the developers like is that they can retrieve what they need with the tool. They don't have to go through some process or request something be done by another team. They can get the programs they need, compile them, retrieve the JCL and alter the JCL if they need to, and put these programs wherever they need to go for their testing."
"I think the most valuable features are code management, code deployment, and code generation. The fact that those three features are included makes BMC Compuware ISPW a robust product. If one of those features was missing, it would be less robust and less interesting. But because it has those three features, it is a very good solution for code development and management."
"The source integrity is the most valuable feature."
"Our automation, our development implementations are all automated, which is a huge amount of time savings."
"Any question that an auditor has about our processes and approvals is all stored in Endevor."
"Having something that is out-of-the-box that you can customize to suit your organization's needs is huge."
"The approach of writing a single set of Endevor processors to work across multiple instances of the application (separate systems) made the processors fairly complex, but once you understand them, they are so powerful."
"We can make it do pretty much whatever we want, depending on just how complicated we want it to be, as it is pretty flexible."
"The source management is excellent."
"We backup people's source code for them."
 

Cons

"Better discussions to identify inventory prior to the start of any migration would be helpful for potential clients that have applications with code that is not modified often."
"When you're setting up the parameters for how ISPW will work in your shop, there are a lot of questions that have to be answered... BMC Compuware should have more in-depth explanations about what the choices in each question mean. If you pick A, what does that mean has to happen? What does that impact? If you pick B, what does that mean? What does that impact?"
"There are some features that are not well documented, so documentation could use a little help, on things like setting up deployment and which structures in the database correspond to which tables."
"One thing I would really like to see some improvement on is the promotion diagnostic messages. It invokes utilities "under the covers" to copy components, and it does not echo back any of the error messages from those utilities."
"The solution could be improved by being better integrated with the open world. In the next release, I would like to have the ability to work in an open environment whilst remaining integrated with the legacy environment."
"The solution is very expensive."
"It is still kind of behind the times. It needs to catch up with all the millennials that want a distributed look and feel.​"
"Needs more audit capability when it comes to changes to settings that are made by administrators, as many of these are done through the panels and are therefore not logged as an action against a configuration item."
"I would like to have better integration with other products."
"The scalability of Endevor could improve."
"Sometimes finding errors and output can be difficult because it spits out so many messages that it is hard to figure out which ones are the ones you need to look at and what flow did it actually take through the processor."
"There should be better integration between CA Endevor Software Change Manager and Zowe."
"The main challenges are its limited interface and the complexity of the customization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I like the seat-based licensing much more than MSU-based licensing, and that the cost has been competitive."
"The price point is great."
"The solution is very expensive."
"The product is expensive."
"It's worth the value. The pricing is fairly good, justifiable for the return on investment."
"Licensing is fairly simple, you don't need multiple licenses."
"It's competitively priced and, as far as I know, it's just an enterprise license. We have found it is worth the money."
"Just make sure if you are going to license, ensure you license the right features.​"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
46%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
34%
Computer Software Company
18%
Insurance Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Endevor?
The product’s implementation process is complicated and restrictive. It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up, at lea...
What is your primary use case for Endevor?
We use the product as a source manager and program manager. It helps in controlling the mainframe code and performing data migrations.
 

Also Known As

No data available
CA Endevor Software Change Manager, Endevor Software Change Manager, CA Software Change Manager for Mainframe, CA Endevor SCM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

mBank, Standard Bank
Blue Hill Data Services Inc.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC Compuware ISPW vs. Endevor and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.