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

AutoSys Workload Automation vs IBM Workload Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 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

AutoSys Workload Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
81
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM Workload Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
12th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of AutoSys Workload Automation is 12.8%, down from 18.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Workload Automation is 7.2%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

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 While the current UI is a bit outdated, it's undergoing improvement.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.
Ilhami Arikan - PeerSpot reviewer
With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes
Sometimes we have issues with the solution's stability. So, stability can be improved. Reporting and visibility of the solution need improvement. These days, we need more visibility. We need to access the logs and databases easily. You need to keep track of the running number of logs, like which ones are executed, completed, etc. So if there would be a good reporting dashboard, then it would be good. There's room for improvement in the solution since it is a challenging thing when we want to use the solution's technology with our new technologies. For example, if we need to use TWS on our OpenShift platform, the solution's API is not capable enough. So the product itself needs to be aligned with new technologies.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's very easy to work with. The learning curve is not that steep."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The scheduling feature allows us to know when jobs are going to run and makes sure they run in the order needed."
"It has helped to simplify cross-dependency between MVS and Open systems jobs."
"AutoSys Workload Automation is scalable."
"I prefer AutoSys over the other ones out there for ease of use, ease of understanding, and getting people to understand how the tool works."
"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 streamlines processing really well, so we're able to cut down on our processing times."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"IBM Workload Automation provides good performance and monitoring."
"The most important feature is the creation of folders. It's a really great feature because you can organize the process with naming conventions."
"The solution helps automate processes so that the workload can be handled on a daily basis."
"It offers features like MDM and a Windows workstation, although there are some technical dependencies. It is more user-friendly and also includes failover and failback capabilities. While both systems offer high availability, Control-M's high availability is superior to AWS's."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Workload Automation is its holistic view, which helps me find technical solutions quickly. For instance, if a customer has an issue completing their workload within a specific time frame, the tool provides enough information to identify and resolve the issue. One of the main challenges is dealing with data infrastructure problems and pending updates. Workload Automation helps me leverage current AI capabilities to recommend architectural updates to avoid these issues. It also allows me to balance CPU usage effectively, ensuring service level agreements are met. The interface is user-friendly and facilitates this process smoothly."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"This solution has a request feature where users can request the added features they need to have developed. Based on client voting for those features, these are developed and released."
 

Cons

"The reporting system, currently, could be better."
"There is a difference between a web interface and the thick client interface. We particularly like a thick client interface, and it has gone away."
"Pricing model for distributed should have an Enterprise option."
"The solution could improve by having support for container environments."
"The WCC could be improved."
"This product needs to improve its graphical user interface."
"To make it a lot more user-friendly, in order to make it so other people can use it without having to do much training with it; the more user-friendly it is, the easier it is to work with."
"SQL server clustering is not supported."
"The performance of the previous versions could be better."
"Slow down on the releases a bit. I fully understand that IWA functionality is increasing at an amazing rate, but trying to keep up with the upgrades is rough."
"The solution should offer more free technical sessions to customers so that they can gain more experience or learn more about how to use it."
"IBM needs to move away from its native terminology and adopt a more cloud-centric approach."
"The solution's installation could be improved because the customers have to do it all the time."
"The schedule refreshes daily and that's a challenge for us."
"There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."
"It is missing some features and can improve in areas where the competition is somewhat better like linking job dependencies."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Validate how many agents you need beforehand."
"The price of this solution is reasonable and there is an annual license required."
"We paid to use the solution monthly."
"It is overpriced."
"The pricing needs to be improved. Some of my client's complained that it was too expensive."
"CA pricing has been a problem, and not looked upon favorably here at all."
"There is an annual license to use AutoSys Workload Automation."
"I don't have information on the exact licensing cost of AutoSys Workload Automation because that's managed by the tools and financing teams. For agents, it's close to $4,00, but for the server setup, it's usually a one-time license initially, and it's AMC which is paid every year and comes close to $8,000 to $10,000."
"To my knowledge, IWA is the only WLA product that will provide "parallel tracking" capability to assist in upgrading from one platform to IWA."
"It is about one-third of the cost of a controller."
"The solution's pricing is affordable."
"The solution is a little bit expensive."
"We transitioned from a server license to per job license, and that saved us a lot money."
"Pricing depends on the number of agents that you install."
"The contract is with the customer with whom we are working, so IBM is not directly involved in this."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
849,190 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%
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

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 needs improvement with IBM Workload Automation?
IBM needs to move away from its native terminology and adopt a more cloud-centric approach. For example, IBM still refers to machines as 'workstations,' whereas other systems, like Control-M, use m...
 

Also Known As

CA Workload Automation, CA Workload Automation AE
IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler, IBM TWS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Gaumont, Mercantil do Brasil, CCEE, Hanwha Life
Standard Life Group, Banca Popolare di Milano, A*STAR, ArcelorMittal Gent
Find out what your peers are saying about AutoSys Workload Automation vs. IBM Workload Automation and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,190 professionals have used our research since 2012.