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 9.0, while Rocket Software is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.2. BMC holds a 26.5% mindshare in WA, compared to Rocket Software’s 3.5% 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 118 Control-M reviews

21,444 Views
8,300 Comparison Views

98% willing to recommend

Rocket Zena

Read 8 Rocket Zena reviews

1,767 Views
1,062 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Control-M

Rocket Zena

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 24, 2024

Control-M and Rocket Zena are competing in the enterprise workload automation category. Although Control-M offers established pricing and support, Rocket Zena is gaining an upper hand due to its innovative features that drive higher investment value.

Features: Control-M provides comprehensive scheduling capabilities, job tracking, and robust automation options across multiple platforms, making it highly versatile. Rocket Zena stands out due to its intuitive workflow automation, flexibility in integrating with cloud environments, and robust monitoring tools. Rocket Zena’s superior cloud integration distinguishes it from Control-M’s focus on multi-platform support.

Room for Improvement: Control-M could enhance its deployment process to reduce complexity and time investment. Offering more affordable entry-level pricing and enhancing cloud integration could also increase its appeal. On the other hand, Rocket Zena could improve its customer support to match the extensiveness of Control-M. Streamlining cloud integrations further and expanding the feature set to cater to a broader range of enterprise requirements might enhance its competitiveness.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Deploying Control-M involves a complex process that requires significant planning but benefits from extensive customer support. In contrast, Rocket Zena offers a streamlined deployment process with quicker setup times, although its customer service is not as comprehensive as Control-M’s. Rocket Zena prioritizes speed of deployment over extensive support, which differentiates it from Control-M.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M’s higher initial setup costs reflect its robust feature set but promises good ROI through long-term stability. Rocket Zena provides a cost-effective initial setup and potential for swift ROI, making it attractive to budget-conscious buyers seeking savings and swift automation deployment. The lower cost of entry with Rocket Zena appeals to those willing to trade off some features for a more affordable upfront price.

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

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 831,020 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

118

Ranking in other categories

Process Automation (3rd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th)

Rocket Zena

Ranking in Workload Automation

14th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 26.5%, up from 25.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zena is 3.5%, up from 3.4% 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

"The Control-M interface is good for creating, monitoring, and ensuring the delivery of files as part of our data pipeline. There's a wealth of information in both the full client, as well as the web interface that they have. Both are very easy to use and provide all the necessary material to understand how to do various tasks. The help feature is very useful and informative and everything is very easy to understand."

"It provides a unified view where you can orchestrate and monitor all your application workloads and data pipelines. That's very important because with cloud, software as a service, edge computing, traditional data center, and legacy apps, there are all these environments. If you don't have that single pane of glass or that one place to look at, you're going to invest a lot of time and resources into tracking things down when they go wrong."

"We value Control-M mainly for the ability to control multiple nodes in a coordinated manner. Control-M has the ability to really coordinate across a lot of nodes."

"Speeds up processes and automated tasks."

"The reporting is top-notch. I haven't found any other applications on the market that can replicate what Control-M offers. The alerting is very good, and I think their service monitoring is the best in the industry."

"In Helix Control-M, we have the automation API that allows us to customize and do integrations easily in any script, such as Java or Python. It is all integrated within the integration API."

"It is very easy to use. The HA feature is also very good."

"Its compatibility with the new technologies and platforms, like the Google Cloud or Amazon, is the most valuable. Its console allows us to view the duration and execution of a process. It is also very easy to use and easy to implement."

More Control-M pros

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

Cons

"It has a slight issue with daylight savings time while advancing the clock in the Spring."

"After we complete FTP jobs, those FTP jobs will be cleared from the Control-M schedule after the noon refresh. So, I struggle to find out where those jobs are saved. Then, we need to request execution of the FTP jobs again. If there could be an option to show the logs, which have been previously completed, that would help us. I can find all other job logs from the server side, but FTP job logs. Maybe I am missing the feature, or if it is not there, it could be added."

"There is definitely room for improvement. Version 9.0.20 actually comes with a web-based interface, but there are still a lot of things unavailable with it. There will eventually be more inclusions added into the web interface, but there is still a long way to go."

"They could enhance the product's data flow, job processing speed, and efficiency."

"Sometimes, with technical support, they will take feedback, but you don't know where that feedback goes or if it proceeds along in the thought process."

"We've also had a few database bugs within our organization. I think we are migrating to OpenJDK rather than just regular Java and that has since shown some issues with our Control-M instance, timing out and causing our jobs to stop running. We are still working with BMC to fine-tune that and get that resolved."

"The unifying features between Control-M for different platforms needs improvement. The scheduling options on the Control-M mainframe jobs are different than they are on our Linux server. There are a few differences here and there."

"The biggest improvement they could have is better QA testing before releases come out the door."

More Control-M cons

"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."

"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."

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

"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 documentation has room for improvement."

"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."

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

"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."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

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

"The pricing and licensing could be better. However, when I compare Control-M pricing with JAMS, Control-M is still better priced than JAMS enterprise."

"Control-M isn't cheap, but this is an enterprise model."

"we are more looking for a better cost/license/performance model because BMC, while we could say it's the best, is also the most expensive. That is what we are probably most annoyed with. We are paying something like €1,000,000 over three years for having 4,000 jobs running. That's expensive."

"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."

"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."

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

831,020 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

29%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

29%

Insurance Company

16%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

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?

Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more.

See all answers

What do you like most about Rocket Zena?

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 usefu...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Rocket Zena?

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

See all answers

What needs improvement with Rocket Zena?

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 ...

See all answers

Comparisons

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 19% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 5% 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 4% of the time

Fortra's JAMS vs Rocket Zena

Compared 3% of the time

More Rocket Zena Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

January 2025

Download Control-M product report

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena

December 2024

Download Rocket Zena product report

Also Known As

Control M

ASG-Zena

Learn More

BMC

Video not available

Rocket Software

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.

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.

Sample Customers

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

Fraternidad Muprespa

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

January 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: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

831,020 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.