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

Control-M vs IBM Workload Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 30, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Customer Service

Sentiment score
8.1
Control-M's customer service is largely praised for responsiveness and support, but some users report delays and documentation issues.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
5.2
Users seek improved reporting, flexibility, integration, cost efficiency, error handling, modern interface, compatibility, and automation in Control-M.
No sentiment score available
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
Users praise Control-M's scalability, managing large job volumes and supporting enterprise environments, including cloud and on-premises deployments.
No sentiment score available
 

Setup Cost

Sentiment score
6.1
Enterprise buyers find Control-M expensive for small businesses due to complex licensing but appreciate its features in larger environments.
No sentiment score available
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
6.4
Control-M is praised for its stability and performance, with quick support and updates resolving issues efficiently.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.2
Control-M offers cross-platform integration, advanced scheduling, and ease of use, enhancing efficiency with automated error handling and comprehensive reporting.
No sentiment score available
 

Categories and Ranking

Control-M
Ranking in Workload Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
117
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th)
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 November 2024, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 26.9%, up from 26.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Workload Automation is 8.4%, up from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

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.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Retailer
6%
Financial Services Firm
32%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
 

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 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?
While it is quite flexible, the licensing cost could be more affordable, especially for small and mid-sized enterprises.
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

Control M
IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler, IBM TWS
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Standard Life Group, Banca Popolare di Milano, A*STAR, ArcelorMittal Gent
Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. IBM Workload Automation and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.