No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Rocket Zeke vs Stonebranch comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 2026

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

JAMS
Sponsored
Ranking in Workload Automation
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
44
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Rocket Zeke
Ranking in Workload Automation
29th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Stonebranch
Ranking in Workload Automation
10th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of JAMS is 3.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zeke is 1.2%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stonebranch is 4.5%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
JAMS3.0%
Stonebranch4.5%
Rocket Zeke1.2%
Other91.3%
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

LV
Principal Data Base And Infrastructure Engineer at a outsourcing company with 501-1,000 employees
Automation has replaced nightly monitoring and delivers reliable, unified job scheduling
We have really enjoyed working with JAMS in terms of notifications, alerts, and streamlining. There used to be a process with Automate, which is another product from Fortra, but even before that, the other division of the company that we were merging with had a tool that was built in-house called a file handler or file distributor. It was an in-house developed tool, but it was not as streamlined or as efficient as JAMS is. We literally had to have a dedicated nighttime person monitoring. Although we are 24/7, the divisions of the company that we were using JAMS for have been small scale. While we have automated it, we have streamlined it in such a way that notifications go out and alerts go out, but if there is anything, then we get paged and alerted, and if anything needs to happen at midnight, we can wake up. On the other hand, with the tool I mentioned, the file handler and distributor, we used to have a dedicated nighttime person that had to be sitting and monitoring it to see when a file arrived, whether it met the conditions, and then execute the next particular job. By using JAMS, we have gained a lot more efficiencies in terms of all of those to streamline it, and there is no necessary need for having an overnight engineer just keeping an eye on all of this.
Daniele Folatelli - PeerSpot reviewer
Mainframe Systems Programmer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
It's a reliable solution that gets a lot done quickly
I work a lot with the support side when there are issues. I see a lot of confusion about the various licenses. The licensing model is somewhat complicated. The product license has to be installed. Sometimes, when a license is expiring and I need a new one, it's hard to understand where those licenses are in the guest support portal. I've discussed this with ASG, and they've acknowledged that it's too complicated. It has had an impact. It's not that the product doesn't work, but we get messages from the user worried that the product will run out of support and their whole operation will be affected.
Saktheeswaran Ravichandran - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Administrator at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Modern workload automation has unified job scheduling and reporting across regions and platforms
I feel that Stonebranch can be improved in certain areas. Since I have been a Control-M user for a very long time and have also used Dollar Universe in the past, creating a task or job and then creating a schedule with time triggers and other triggers in different objects feels a bit complicated compared to other tools in the market where everything is laid out in a single pane and scheduling is easy. Here, since we have a task and a time schedule and time trigger separately from the task, I am getting a bit confused becoming accustomed to those concepts, but that can be managed more easily.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The key benefits about JAMS is having the ability to run long running jobs on-premise as compared to products like Azure Data Factory."
"The interface is good, and it's very easy to define and create jobs. If a job is not running or there is an error, the solution will send an email. That's all very good and very useful."
"It has definitely drastically improved our capabilities to scale our automation. Before JAMS, there were a lot of manual processes. We had a couple of operators who spent all day doing that. A lot of the time with human intervention and human processes, it is as good as the person who may be following a procedure and human error is a big problem."
"The fact that we no longer need to use Excel spreadsheets is huge."
"The alerting in it is really targeted... you can set specific alerting so that if jobs in a given folder fail, certain people are alerted. You can also set security at the folder level, so that only people in those areas can go set them. That means that the alerting and security can be set at a very granular level."
"By using JAMS, my company has seen benefits such as getting to know about Google products and the latest features that are newly launched by Google, and they help me in building my projects portfolio and engaging with knowledge."
"The feature or capability to import a job is most valuable. We can import an existing job from different platforms, and all the configurations get migrated as well without modifying the code, job schedule, etc."
"The most valuable feature is the easily accessible data in the database because we run a lot of SQL scripting against the database."
"Two features are valuable. One is Rocket Zeke's ability to integrate with the mainframe, which is the main processor using the agent. It works on any computer, so users don't have to wait. They can use their laptop or any other way to connect and securely access all the necessary information. The other valuable feature is automation, which is an integral part of batch processing."
"The features are upgraded, and every six months they're releasing patches."
"Throughout the years we have been working with UAC, the experience we have had with support has been very good."
"Earlier, it used to take us a lot of time for file transfers and creating a backup, but after this automation, the pain and time have been reduced a lot."
"We ended up saving a considerable amount every year, we got more for less, and it has also saved us a lot of man-hours in support and maintenance as we were able to go down by three FTEs by implementing the solution."
"For support, as compared with GoAnywhere, Stonebranch is more supportive because they respond quickly."
"Stonebranch has saved us money, eliminated dependency gaps between workflow steps, and significantly reduced missed SLAs by ensuring we immediately know when a workflow fails so support teams can resolve issues before deadlines are missed."
"We lean a lot on the multi-tenancy that they offer within the product, the ability to get other people to self-manage their estate, versus having a central team do all the scheduling."
"Our organization could enter the cloud at full speed."
 

Cons

"JAMS notifications for hung jobs could be improved."
"Fortra is getting much better with documentation and examples, but there is still room for improvement."
"I would like to see the ability to interface with Microsoft group-managed service accounts, but they're still in the research phase. They need to ensure everything's legit and safe. The report designer and dashboards could also be improved. We're running 7.3, so I don't know if they have updated the reporting in 7.5, but I think the reports and dashboards could be better."
"As an admin, I would like to have a web-based GUI instead of a client application that we have to install on our PCs."
"The client is horrible. Every time JAMS puts out a survey on what they can improve, I always say, "The client: When you are setting up jobs, it is quite horrible." The response has been, "Well, we are just using the Windows foundation," and I am like, "Why isn't it only your product?" We can get around it now that we know its quirks, but it is not the most user-friendly of tools out there. The UI is completely unintuitive. We had to go and open up a support ticket with JAMS just to get something back. It is not user-friendly at all."
"When looking at a folder in JAMS with many jobs, it would be good to have better information in the list display of what's inside those jobs. We get some information, but other important details are missing."
"There could be a better simulation for banning the termination. You have to simulate every one of the processes in order to have an idea for better planning. This kind of simulation is broken and needs improvement."
"The search capability needs to be improved because when we try to search for a job, it's hard to do."
"I work a lot with the support side when there are issues. I see a lot of confusion about the various licenses. The licensing model is somewhat complicated. The product license has to be installed. Sometimes, when a license is expiring and I need a new one, it's hard to understand where those licenses are in the guest support portal. I've discussed this with Rocket Zeke, and they've acknowledged that it's too complicated."
"Stonebranch is not stable as it has its flaws."
"Real-time analytics in Stonebranch are available from the current statuses of the jobs. However, we are disappointed with the reports."
"Dealing with customer requirements and enhancements, the process now is a little bit non-transparent."
"There is a component called the OMS, which is the message broker. We rely on infrastructure, resiliency, and availability for that piece. If that could change to be highly available just as a software component, so that we don't have to provide the high-available storage, etc. for it, that would be a plus. It would just be cheaper to run."
"Occasionally, we have an agent that doesn't come back up after OS patching."
"The API's need to fully meet the capabilities of the user interface. Better support of workload balancers (F5)."
"The Universal Controller is decent for the money it costs... It needs some work to have full features, compared to other products that are out there, specifically IBM's Workload Scheduler."
"Stonebranch Universal Automation Center could improve the analytics."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Definitely check how many single processes you want to run and count them as jobs. That is how you would work out your pricing on JAMS. For example, if you're running a number of commands and you can put them all into one script and run that script, you can count that as one job."
"JAMS is relatively inexpensive, with additional costs only incurred for tags, other services, and optional support renewals."
"JAMS is close to the lower end of the pricing models for enterprise scheduling solutions. They are much cheaper than Control-M, as well as some other products that I've used. I also don't know of another solution where you can actually get true, unlimited licensing, where you can have as many instances and as many agents as you want."
"JAMS is priced competitively compared to similar solutions and offers flexible licensing options to cater to user needs."
"Take advantage of its scalability. You can start small. The initial cost is very reasonable. Once you have started picking up the tool and adopting it, then you can scale up from there and buy more agents."
"It's certainly a lot cheaper than Tivoli and Control-M. In comparison to them, you get a lot more bang for your buck. You get pretty much the whole functionality and more, in some cases, when compared to Control-M, but at a fraction of the price."
"The product is reasonably priced, and we don't have any add-ons."
"Our licensing is pretty cheap because we have a state solution. So, we pay only $1,000 a year."
"I don't make purchasing decisions, but the decision-makers tell me they don't switch to other solutions because this one has the price they need. Pricing is part of their decision to stick with this product."
"Outside of licensing fees, there aren't any other costs."
"Stonebranch is cheaper than Control-M, so many companies are using Stonebranch."
"When we reviewed this solution against other vendors, Stonebranch blew everybody out of the water in terms of cost."
"I don't have pricing information, but I do know it's cheaper than our old legacy system. Other than the standard licensing fees there are no additional costs."
"The price of the solution is at a medium level compared to the competition."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
899,052 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Construction Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
37%
Construction Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Insurance Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise14
Large Enterprise20
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business2
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise26
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JAMS?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing was acceptable. I have gone with JAMS licen...
What needs improvement with JAMS?
I am fine with what JAMS offers and have nothing to suggest for improvement. JAMS' code-driven automation is not wide...
What is your primary use case for JAMS?
My main use case for JAMS is scheduling, which is the primary usage. I am mainly using JAMS for scheduling various jo...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Stonebranch Universal Automation Center?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing has been straightforward.
What needs improvement with Stonebranch Universal Automation Center?
Stonebranch is more expensive compared with GoAnywhere MFT because they provide many types of services, protocols, an...
What is your primary use case for Stonebranch Universal Automation Center?
Currently, I only work with Stonebranch. We are partners of Stonebranch, as they are an OEM. I am from the technical ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
ASG Zeke
Stonebranch Universal Automation Center
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Teradata, Arconic, General Dynamics, Yum!, CVS Health, Comcast, Ghiradelli, & Boston’s Children’s Hospital
Reliance, Raley's, Oney, Primerica, Postbank
Nissan, Coop, United Supermarkets, Groupon, CSC, Orbitz, Johnson & Johnson, BMW, Qantas.
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC, Broadcom, JAMS Software and others in Workload Automation. Updated: May 2026.
899,052 professionals have used our research since 2012.