Control-M vs Rocket Zena comparison

BMC and Rocket Software are both solutions in the Workload Automation category. BMC is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.8, while Rocket Software is ranked #20. BMC holds a 25.4% mindshare in WA, compared to Rocket Software’s 3.1% mindshare. Additionally, 98% of BMC users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Rocket Software users who would recommend it.

Control-M

Read 120 Control-M reviews

20,038 Views
7,869 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

Rocket Zena

Read 8 Rocket Zena reviews

1,564 Views
975 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Control-M

Rocket Zena

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

Control-M and Rocket Zena are competing enterprise automation solutions. Control-M tends to have the upper hand due to its superior scalability and integration capabilities, making it more suitable for organizations with extensive automation needs, whereas Rocket Zena's ease of use and cost-effectiveness might be more appealing to smaller companies or those prioritizing efficiency.

Features: Control-M offers cross-platform support, integration with various applications such as SAP and Oracle, and a comprehensive GUI that simplifies job management. Rocket Zena provides a user-friendly interface with a diagram view for easy navigation, simplified Linux configuration, and efficient containerized deployment.

Room for Improvement: Control-M could enhance user experience by simplifying the initial setup process and reducing deployment complexity. It would also benefit from more competitive pricing for smaller enterprises. Rocket Zena could improve by expanding its integration capabilities and offering additional advanced features to better compete with higher-end solutions.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Rocket Zena offers rapid deployment and responsive customer service, making it appealing for teams looking for a straightforward setup. Control-M, with its more complex deployment process, is more suited to large-scale environments but provides extensive support and training services.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M may have higher setup costs but offers significant long-term ROI for enterprises needing comprehensive automation. Rocket Zena is a cost-effective choice with faster ROI thanks to its lower initial investment, appealing to businesses seeking a quick and efficient solution.

To learn more, read our detailed Control-M vs. Rocket Zena Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 842,388 peers since 2012

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

Control-M

Ranking in Workload Automation

1st

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

120

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (2nd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th)

Rocket Zena

Ranking in Workload Automation

20th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 25.4%, down from 26.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zena is 3.1%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Workload Automation

Featured Reviews

Pedro Fuentes

System Engineer at Community Loans of America, Inc.

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.

Read full review

JuanGonzalez6

IT Solutions Manager at a government with 5,001-10,000 employees

A continuously evolving, stable solution, with responsive support

The visual whiteboard for design and execution included with the solution is very crucial to those who are new to Rocket Zena, especially so that the learning curve is minimized and they can focus on accomplishing the task. We process our system's payroll through Rocket Zena. The fact that it's a multi-process, multi-layered application, means that we can rely on the solution for kicking off processes, notifying user vendors of the steps, completions, error logging, and historic events from the previous run times. Rocket Zena's ability to automate jobs on the mainframe as a distribution workload automation solution is good. The solution continuously improves over time. We're eager to start the latest upgrade this coming year that'll put us on the cloud. Hopefully, this will improve the product even more. We can run things natively without the scheduler if needed. The solution working properly and up to date without the need for a mainframe scheduler is crucial. We use the solution to manage a few complex operational workflows end-to-end across multiple technology stacks. Rocket Zena does a great job of simplifying our cross-platform processes through automation. The solution helps speed operations up and keeps them automated allowing us to focus on other priorities. The solution helps increase our completion rates by working overnight to meet our SLAs. Rocket Zena completes 30 percent of our workload outside of our standard work hours. Rocket Zena's cross-platform job scheduling helped us save around 40 percent of programming time by automating repetitive tasks. We use the solution to transfer our current files and keep up with our infrastructure on a few automated jobs, such as refreshing our database which happens overnight. The solution helped free up around 15 percent of our engineer's time to focus on more value-added work.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Technical support is very helpful and available 24/7."

"The product has improved dramatically over the years; it offers a lot in terms of features and capabilities and integration with third-party tools. A wide range of models available with the product is critical in reducing manual and mundane work such as custom script writing. This saves significant amounts of time and, by association, money for the organization."

"Monitoring is a valuable aspect of it. The monitoring tool is very good, and it is easy for expert and entry level users to use on a short notice."

"Self Service, BIM features are most valuable. As no need to login to EM client and check the job status."

"It is very stable. We hardly get calls in respect to issues on Control-M, particularly on version 9.0.19."

"I would definitely recommend Control-M to every institute because it is extremely helpful to manage every task without any manual error."

"The feature we use most in Control-M is related to the file transfer module. It is quite advanced compared to the other tools like Automate, etc. The new version which has come of same MFT has a lot of advanced features which makes it very easy to work with. There is less need for written programs and more GUI-based stuff."

"The most valuable feature is the reporting function. It allows us to pull up reports for specific information that the end-users are looking for."

More Control-M pros

"Its FTP feature is very good, as is scheduling any process or task with the Zena client. I have found it to be very helpful. If a task fails, it gives you a prompt."

"The most valuable feature is the FTP file transfer."

"From a Linux configuration point of view, Rocket Zena is straightforward. It's fairly easy to set up the server and agents once you know how to do it."

"I like the whole product, but specifically, I like the license part. It's very easy to acquire a license for this product."

"In the latest upgrade, Zena added a web-based client. The more I use it, the more I like it. It's an excellent interface. They do a good job of steadily improving the solution to make it more useful."

"You can click Ctrl-G and bring a diagram view. You're able to view in a diagram format. The view that it provides is easy, and you can move to the left, up, or down. You can double-click on a certain process. It'll drill into that process and all of its underlying components. You can double-click on an arrow or a component, and it'll bring up a screen that'll have all the variables that are assigned to that particular piece, as well as the values at run time. So, the diagram feature of it, at least for me, is pretty valuable."

"I have found the scheduling feature the most valuable. I can map dependencies by using ASG-Zena. It gives a nice, quick visualization as to where things are."

"We haven't had any problems since we installed it. It runs as expected, we haven't had any critical problems. It helps keeps the business running 24/7."

Cons

"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."

"Reporting in Control-M could use improvement."

"Advanced File Transfer (AFT) has limitations that cause us to use a bit more licensing than we feel is appropriate."

"It is a very strong product, but the reporting could be better."

"Their technicians should be more involved when we're applying new technology to Control-M, such as cloud. We're working with cloud right now, with AWS, and getting the attention of a technician, sometimes, can take some time. It would be nice if they had somebody assigned to it. Dedicated support."

"For installing or upgrading the PeopleSoft and SAP plugins, currently there is no way to do it via Control-M Configuration Manager. So, we are installing or upgrading the plugins, like PeopleSoft and SAP, manually. If BMC could provide an option via Control-M Configuration Manager to upgrade these plugins, it probably would reduce a lot of manual work as well as ease our work. This is one improvement that I personally want to see, because it would help our way of working."

"The high availability that comes from BMC with its supplied Postgres database is very limited. Even using your customer-supplied Postgres database is problematic. We have engaged with them regarding this, but it is difficult. My company doesn't want to do this and BMC doesn't want to do that. We just need to find some middle ground to get the proper high availability. We're also moving away, like the rest of the world, from the more expensive offerings, like Oracle. We are trying to use Postgres, which is free. The stability is good. It is just that the high availability configuration is not ideal. It could be better."

"I would like to see more auditing capabilities. Right now, it has the basics and I've been trying to set those up to work with what our auditors are looking for."

More Control-M cons

"In the next release, I would like the user experience to be improved. The user interface should be more appealing to gen-z."

"One area where it could be improved is communication between the different servers. Sometimes there are processes that have already been completed but we get a status notification that they're still active."

"Rocket Zena is a mainframe-based job scheduler. I would like it to be more open so that we can use it on a distributed platform."

"The UI is not intuitive, and it would be nice if there was a web interface."

"The documentation has room for improvement."

"Another one that is probably a little bit bigger for me is that when there is an issue or there's an error, it writes on a different screen. I have to find the actual process name and go to a different screen to view the alert that got generated. On that screen, everyone's processes, not just the processes of the folks in my department, are thrown. It takes me a while to find the actual error so that I could go in there and look at the alert. It could be because of the way it was set up, but at least for me, it isn't too intuitive."

"The scheduling mapping is a little disjointed. There is no wizard-type approach. There are a lot of different things that you have to do in completely different areas. They could probably add the functionality for creating all components of a mapping or an OPA schedule. The component creation could be done collectively rather than through individual components."

"In the web interface, it stacks the tasks across the top, and they accumulate until you close or clean those out. That seems a little cumbersome. You must right-click and close all tabs constantly to keep the console clean and manage your views."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It works on task-based licensing."

"This is now from my previous years as support for banks and big companies. If it's not enterprise scale, I find that it's too expensive for smaller companies. You really have to be quite big and need to have a dedicated support staff to run it, then you'll be fine. What we've seen at smaller companies, it's too expensive because they want to automate everything. Now, stuff that can literally run once a day for the rest of their lives is costing them $3 a job a day. It becomes too expensive, eventually. They are not seeing the return on investment because it's not business critical. Nobody is going to die or they're going to lose money if that job didn't run exactly at 11 minutes past 4:00. It's definitely for bigger enterprise companies, especially banks or healthcare providers. We have had an instance where Control-M was unavailable due to external factors for 20 minutes and there was a loss of almost a million euros because the solution involved logistics."

"Its pricing and licensing could be a little bit better. Based on my experience and discussions with other existing customers, everybody feels that the regular Managed File Transfer piece, not the enterprise one, is a little overpriced, especially for folks who already have licensed Advanced File Transfer. We understand that Advanced File Transfer is going away and is going to be the end of life, and there is some additional functionality built into MFT, but the additional functionality does not really correlate with the huge price increase over what we're paying for AFT already. This has actually driven a lot of people to look for alternative solutions."

"It is not bad. The company can afford it, and it pays for itself. We have those jobs running automatically."

"This is an area where it is a little difficult to work with BMC. They want to do licenses by job, which is what we have. For example, the simplest is to license by job, but they can also license by nodes. While the licensing is simple to use, it might not be the correct licensing model for the customer. It is okay because we want to license by job, which is something measurable. At the end of the day, licensing by job is the most important."

"The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."

"Pricing varies depending on which components and modules you are using."

"We have a license till 2024. We are good and satisfied with it."

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

"The pricing and the licensing are good. It is affordable and can be used to improve and optimize productivity."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

28%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

30%

Insurance Company

15%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Computer Software Company

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?

It is a little bit expensive.

See all answers

What are some of the things you've done to recession-proof your tech stacks?

Automation can play a pivotal role here. Many users understood that during an economic downturn, they needed to achieve more with limited resources. Automation emerged as a powerful solution to fil...

See all answers

Do you have any tips for managing my company's modernization, without any disruptions?

Today, we will look at the legacy systems, the red flags that point at the system getting old and rusty, and the ways a reliable custom software. This guide: https://www.cleveroad.com/blog/legacy-s...

See all answers

How can hybrid cloud solutions benefit our organization’s infrastructure?

Hybrid cloud solutions can be really beneficial for organizations' infrastructure. The flexibility and versatility they provide can enable users the ability to adapt to changing business needs and ...

See all answers

Comparisons

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 16% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 9% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

ESP Workload Automation Intelligence vs Control-M

Compared 4% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

Rocket Zeke vs Rocket Zena

Compared 18% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 11% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 5% of the time

JAMS vs Rocket Zena

Compared 4% of the time

Stonebranch vs Rocket Zena

Compared 3% of the time

More Rocket Zena Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

March 2025

Download Control-M product report

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena

March 2025

Download Rocket Zena product report

Also Known As

Control M

ASG-Zena

Overview

Control-M is used for enterprise workload automation, orchestrating finance, retail, healthcare, and supply chain processes. It handles batch job scheduling, managed file transfers, cloud integrations, and compliance auditing across on-premises, cloud, and hybrid environments.

Organizations leverage Control-M to efficiently monitor and manage business-critical processes like payroll, HR, SAP, Informatica, and database tasks. It enhances visibility, security, and error resolution. Automating and optimizing workflows in data centers, AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud Platform, Control-M supports diverse technological environments. The platform's robust capabilities make it suitable for effective centralized management of applications and data pipelines, ensuring enhanced collaboration and scalability.

What are Control-M's most important features?

Integration capabilities: Seamlessly integrates with various systems
Automation API: Facilitates automation through APIs
Managed File Transfer: Simplifies secure file transfers
GUI console: Intuitive graphical user interface
Role-based administration: Provides access control
Single-pane view: Centralized monitoring dashboard
Scheduling options: Flexible job scheduling
Workflow orchestration: Coordinates complex workflows
Reporting: Generates insightful reports
Monitoring: Tracks and manages tasks
Forecasting: Predicts future workloads
Self-service portal: Empowers users with self-service tools
Plugins: Extends functionality through additional plugins

What are the benefits or ROI of using Control-M?

Enhanced visibility: Centralized view of all processes
Ease of use: User-friendly interface
Error reduction: Minimizes manual errors
Improved collaboration: Facilitates teamwork
Scalability: Supports growth and scale
Support: Comprehensive customer support

Control-M is implemented in industries like finance to handle payroll and HR tasks, in retail for inventory management and supply chain processes, and in healthcare for compliance auditing and patient data processing. Organizations benefit from streamlined workflows and automated processes across on-premises, cloud, and hybrid environments, ensuring efficient and secure operations.

BMC

Rocket Zena automates and schedules tasks across mainframe, Linux, and Windows environments, reducing human errors and managing dependencies.

Rocket Zena serves as a powerful tool for scheduling and automating tasks across multiple platforms. Its capabilities extend to managing batch jobs, ETLs, SFTP transfers, database backups, organizing workflows, running scripts, managing payroll tasks, and customizing schedules to avoid manual interventions. Users benefit from a user-friendly interface and efficient containerized deployment with clear process visualization through diagram and whiteboard features. The platform supports file transfers, automates workflows, saves time, and reduces errors, with straightforward licensing and commendable technical support.

What are the most important features?

User-Friendly Interface: Easy to navigate for efficient task management.
Cross-Platform Job Scheduling: Simplifies task automation across different environments.
Containerized Deployment: Ensures efficient resource use and deployment.
Diagram and Whiteboard Features: Visualizes processes clearly for better understanding.
FTP File Transfers: Facilitates seamless file transfer between systems.
Workflow Automation: Saves time and minimizes errors with automated workflows.
Straightforward Licensing: Offers clear and simple licensing options.
Commendable Technical Support: Provides reliable customer support and assistance.

What benefits or ROI should users look for?

Reduced Human Errors: Automation lowers the chance of mistakes in repetitive tasks.
Time Savings: Efficient scheduling and automation allow for quicker task completion.
Improved Process Management: Enhanced organization and visualization of workflows.
Dependable Support: Access to reliable technical assistance when needed.

Rocket Zena sees implementations in industries requiring robust task scheduling and automation such as finance for managing payroll and database backups, healthcare for handling ETL operations and workflow organization, and IT for running scripts and managing batch jobs. Adaptation to industry-specific needs showcases its versatility, although users seek improvements in scheduling mapping, UI navigation, and desire cloud availability.

Rocket Software

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc

Fraternidad Muprespa

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

March 2025

Free Report: Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. Rocket Zena and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

842,388 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Control-M vs. Rocket Zena report.

See our list of best Workload Automation vendors.

We monitor all Workload Automation reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.