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

Control-M vs vCenter Orchestrator comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Control-M improves efficiency and cost savings by automating tasks, reducing errors, and enhancing integration with existing applications.
Sentiment score
6.0
Medium to large enterprises gain ROI from virtualization, but quantifying returns is challenging; vCenter Orchestrator suits specific needs.
The main return on investment with Helix Control-M has been a reduction in downtime and minimization of manual interventions, which has improved our operational efficiency.
You can run a million batch jobs or tasks at night when all of your highly skilled people are at home sleeping.
It has reduced the total cost of ownership by 30% to 40%.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Control-M support is responsive and knowledgeable, offering 24/7 assistance with high satisfaction, timely solutions, and valuable resources.
Sentiment score
6.2
VMware support is praised for communication and resolution but needs faster response and deeper expertise in some cases.
The technical support is very polite, helpful, and available 24/7.
If something fails at 3 AM in the morning, you need to fix it and get it back up and working really quickly.
The immediate acknowledgment and solutions provided by BMC's support team make it stand out compared to other tools.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
Control-M efficiently manages growing job counts across enterprises, offering straightforward scalability despite some cost and cloud integration concerns.
Sentiment score
7.3
vCenter Orchestrator effectively scales from small to large environments, adapting well despite some hardware-specific challenges.
It can absorb more workload wherever needed.
As the workload on Control-M increases, its scalability is much higher.
I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Control-M is highly stable and reliable, efficiently handling large workloads with minimal issues and strong Unix platform performance.
Sentiment score
7.9
vCenter Orchestrator is highly stable, reliable, and efficient, with occasional issues, praised for trustworthy performance by users.
The downtime is higher compared to AWS.
The testing and development phases need to be more rigorous before releasing patches.
The stability of the Helix Control-M solution is good.
 

Room For Improvement

Control-M users seek enhanced analysis, flexibility, and integration while desiring cost-effective, streamlined interfaces and better API documentation.
vCenter Orchestrator requires affordability, interface improvements, better integration, automation features, simpler workflows, and accessible support and resources.
They could provide more documentation and tutorials to make the initial setup easier to understand.
There should be an automation system for developers to set it up more easily and quickly.
What they've done about scheduling, other people are still trying to figure out.
 

Setup Cost

Control-M's pricing is high, with complex licensing, but offers robust features that larger enterprises may find valuable.
Enterprise users have mixed opinions on vCenter Orchestrator pricing, with some finding it expensive due to complex licensing.
The licensing cost is very high, and they often consider switching to IBM Workload Scheduler or other options.
Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more.
The best cell phone will always be more expensive.
 

Valuable Features

Control-M offers robust orchestration, automation, and integration features, enhancing productivity and minimizing manual efforts across large-scale environments.
vCenter Orchestrator offers seamless automation, easy integration, scalability, user-friendly interface, and cost-effective virtual machine management.
Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.
The user interface is comprehensive and lets me view all my jobs on one page, monitor everything, and access the job history.
Control-M provides workflow orchestration, including scheduling, deploying, managing, and monitoring workflows.
 

Categories and Ranking

Control-M
Ranking in Process Automation
2nd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
123
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (3rd), Workload Automation (1st)
vCenter Orchestrator
Ranking in Process Automation
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 4.6%, up from 4.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of vCenter Orchestrator is 0.3%, down from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Ujjwal Sachdeva - PeerSpot reviewer
Efficient automation and boosted workflow but needs better integration methods
Control-M is a bit faster compared to other solutions. The job and coding are easier. Also, my DevOps and Ops teams work collaboratively with it, enhancing its efficiency. The workflow is much easier compared to the ACS services we were using. Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.
Gerhard Gmelch - PeerSpot reviewer
Enhance automation efficiency with cost-effective graphical workflow design
I use vCenter Orchestrator for automation purposes, specifically to run automation workbooks The most valuable features are the graphical UI for designing the workflows and the interfaces that come out of the box. Additionally, it is included in the VMware Vitalization Stack, which means there…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
11%
Manufacturing 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 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?
Its cost can be more competitive. One of the main things customers look at is the cost. It's not affordable. The cost is very high, according to my customers. The licensing cost is very high, and t...
What do you like most about vCenter Orchestrator?
The stability of the product is very good.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for vCenter Orchestrator?
We're running a low-profile budget. This is not our main focus on investment technology, so we're trying to reduce costs due to the change from perpetual to subscription licenses.
What needs improvement with vCenter Orchestrator?
After the change from perpetual licensing to subscriptions, the cost model changed. We are considering alternatives since we lost the perpetual aspect, and support is changing.
 

Also Known As

Control M
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Beiersdorf Shared Services
Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. vCenter Orchestrator and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
861,524 professionals have used our research since 2012.