Rocket Zena vs Stonebranch comparison

Rocket Software and Stonebranch are both solutions in the Workload Automation category. Rocket Software is ranked #22, while Stonebranch is ranked #9 with an average rating of 10.0. Rocket Software holds a 2.5% mindshare in WA, compared to Stonebranch’s 4.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Rocket Software users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 93% of Stonebranch users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 2025

Stonebranch and Rocket Zena are competitors in the automation and orchestration industry. Stonebranch is often preferred for its pricing and support, while Rocket Zena stands out with more features, justifying a higher price point.

Features: Stonebranch offers cross-platform automation, a user-friendly interface, and real-time analytics. Rocket Zena is known for excellent integration capabilities, security features, and a comprehensive set of features that appeal to larger setups.

Room for Improvement: Stonebranch can enhance its integration capabilities to match the breadth offered by Rocket Zena and expand its feature set for larger enterprises. Rocket Zena, on the other hand, can improve its ease of use to be more intuitive and enhance its deployment simplicity by streamlining the onboarding process. Pricing adjustments might help Rocket Zena become more attractive to smaller businesses.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Stonebranch provides a simple deployment process and has an excellent reputation for customer support. Rocket Zena offers scalable deployment but involves more complexity, fitting best for larger organizations. Both products offer strong customer support, although Rocket Zena is tailored for scalability.

Pricing and ROI: Stonebranch features a competitive initial cost and a high ROI, appealing to small-to-medium businesses due to its efficient operation and lower investment. Rocket Zena, while having a higher initial setup cost, provides a compelling ROI for enterprises needing extensive automation functionality due to its advanced features.

To learn more, read our detailed Rocket Zena vs. Stonebranch Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena vs. Stonebranch

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 879,899 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

JAMS

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of JAMS is 2.6%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zena is 2.5%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stonebranch is 4.4%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Workload Automation Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
JAMS	2.6%
Stonebranch	4.4%
Rocket Zena	2.5%
Other	90.5%

Workload Automation

Featured Reviews

reviewer2770605

Cloud Engineer at a financial services firm with 501-1,000 employees

Has streamlined complex job scheduling across scripting languages while reducing manual effort

JAMS could be improved with a web client that is accessible and as fast as a normal website, eliminating the need to RDP to the servers to access the JAMS client. A functionality running on the JAMS server to continuously check the JAMS agents would ensure they are working properly. If an agent is not responding, a feature to restart the service from the job server machine would be beneficial. The upgrade process, particularly when switching from V6 to V7, could be clearer in terms of documentation, ideally with screenshots showing exactly what needs to be done on each screen.

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

Saktheeswaran Ravichandran

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.

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 overall product is fantastic. I love it. It has been a fantastic, solid product. If I have one tiny bit of a problem with it, the support team gets in touch with me right away. I don't know if I've had another service that has been as fantastic as the JAMS support team."

"JAMS has been a beneficial monitoring tool for our project in terms of being able to deliver data that is essential for users."

"Previously, we manually managed file transfers by writing our scripts. The automated MFT feature is great for me and the company. It helps us know where the files are going and enables us to track errors if anything fails. It also makes the connection seamless for third-party vendors."

"I like how you can add new execution methods on the fly. It isn't overly complex to add Python script support to an execution method in the JAMS system. The scheduling is excellent. You can schedule a maintenance window and take that resource unit out of everything. It halts all of the jobs."

"The product is easy to use."

"Our company is based on data. Everything we do is data-driven, so it has been very valuable having one place where we can process all of the data and do batch schedules with chunks of data."

"The planning capabilities are most valuable."

"The most valuable feature of JAMS is its user-friendly interface, especially after upgrading from version six to seven."

More JAMS pros

"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."

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

"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."

"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."

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

"Stonebranch performs well, and the graphical representation is excellent. Overall, it requires more technical effort from our teams, but the solution is intuitive, so anybody can use it."

"The features are upgraded, and every six months they're releasing patches."

"In every way, Stonebranch is a very much improved product in the industry."

"When it comes to agent technology and compatibility with other vendors, from a platform perspective it was the one vendor that fit all the platforms that we have, from your old platforms - mainframe, NSK, IBM i - to the new ones, going into cloud and container"

"I love the Universal Controller. It's been great for us. We host it on-premise... It's High Availability, meaning there's failover from one server to the other if one goes down."

"Stonebranch is a very handy tool, especially if you want to orchestrate your product and are looking for something very scalable and stable; Stonebranch is very useful."

"The Universal Agent is the most valuable feature. Being agent-based and being able to go across multiple technology stacks, which is what our workflows do, Stonebranch gives us the ability to bridge those disparate technologies. It enables us to remove the dependency-gap with the agent so we know the status of the workflow at each step."

"I can name the aliases on the agent, so if we need a passive environment for an agent, that's one of the nice features. If our primary goes down, I can bring up the passive one and I don't have to change anything in the scheduling world. It will start running from that new server."

More Stonebranch pros

Cons

"The error messages from JAMS often need clarification, hindering our ability to resolve issues swiftly."

"I'm not sure if they have fixed it in a newer version, but there is no global search in the version I have. If I have multiple sub-folders that are named for business units, like HR or IT, and I have to search for a job, I cannot search from the top. I have to go to the HR folder to search for a particular job, or to the IT folder."

"The product does not allow the users to cut and paste the job names from the screen."

"JAMS has built-in reporting. I've never really used it. I tried using it a few years ago and I couldn't figure it out. It was wonky. It could be improved upon."

"Fortra is getting much better with documentation and examples, but there is still room for improvement."

"We have had a lot of people working from home who can't always connect to the JAMS server. We use VPN, as most companies do, and we have it set up so that everybody can access the JAMS server. But many times, our people cannot access it... JAMS could do a better job of telling you what the problem is when you try to log in to the server."

"The monitoring of the JAMS product and its performance is an area of concern for me."

"One thing that I know that the JAMS people said that they were working on that would be huge for us is a search capability so that you could search for tasks. It may be available in version 7 or in a future release of 7. I think that's on their roadmap. But right now, for us to do a search, we have to search through database queries."

More JAMS cons

"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."

"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."

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

"The documentation has room for improvement."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"I have a request regarding our agent on the mainframe. It may time out when communicating to the Universal Controller, when the mainframe is extremely busy. That can cause a task which is running at that time to not see the results of the job that ran on the mainframe. It happens sporadically during times of really busy CPU usage. We're expecting that enhancement from them in the fourth quarter."

"Occasionally, we have an agent that doesn't come back up after patching. That doesn't happen very often... It's really just a restart of the agent and it comes back up. But that might be one thing that could be improved."

"It can't handle negative written codes."

"It's not available on the cloud, so they should take that due to safety, security, and scalability."

"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."

"One hiccup we've had is due to the fact that we have other internal scheduling tools. We're able to talk to them, but we have trouble with some of the networking between them, so we're still trying to work out the kinks there."

"There is room for improvement with its connectivity with the Microsoft SRS system. It is very weak. They keep telling us it works with it, and technically it does, but it does not provide a lot of visibility. We have lost a lot of visibility migrating to Stonebranch, compared with just running tasks on the SRS server. That's really about the only thing that is a sore point for us."

"Stonebranch Universal Automation Center could improve the analytics."

More Stonebranch cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"All licensing models are a little overpriced, but JAMS offers a good value, especially given their support response times and ability to handle unforeseen issues like the SFTP transfers. I hope to find more use cases to get a better bang for our buck."

"The product is reasonably priced, and we don't have any add-ons."

"This is a good product at a fair price."

"The pricing is very fair. We have seen very minimal to no price increases over the years. We are not banging down the door of support all the time either. I would imagine if we were a company that submitted a dozen support tickets a week for the last nine years, then it might be a little different because we would be eating up everybody's time. However, for what we get out of it, the pricing is extremely fair. Back when we were originally looking and brought in JAMS, we were looking at a couple of the other competitive products that were in this space, but the pricing from JAMS was far and away better than what the other competitors could offer for the same functionality."

"It was $10,000 for the first year. Then, there is a maintenance cost for licensing every year that we get billed $5,000 for every year."

"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."

"The licensing model for JAMS is straightforward and based on the number of agents, not the number of jobs you run. It's cheap and fairly simple."

"JAMS is relatively inexpensive, with additional costs only incurred for tags, other services, and optional support renewals."

More JAMS pricing and cost advice

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

"Outside of licensing fees, there aren't any other costs."

"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."

"Stonebranch is cheaper than Control-M, so many companies are using Stonebranch."

"The price of the solution is at a medium level compared to the competition."

"When we reviewed this solution against other vendors, Stonebranch blew everybody out of the water in terms of cost."

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

879,899 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

30%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	18

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	23

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about JAMS?

I find the historical tracking feature of JAMS invaluable for reviewing past events.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JAMS?

They recently switched to subscription-based pricing, which increased. The price is fair considering the functionalit...

See all answers

What needs improvement with JAMS?

As far as we are using JAMS version 6, it looks good and there is nothing major to add about it. Everything is functi...

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Control-M vs JAMS

Compared 20% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs JAMS

Compared 11% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs JAMS

Compared 10% of the time

Automic Automation vs JAMS

Compared 8% of the time

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs JAMS

Compared 5% of the time

More JAMS Competitors

Control-M vs Rocket Zena

Compared 41% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 15% of the time

Rocket Zeke vs Rocket Zena

Compared 11% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 8% of the time

Tidal by Redwood vs Rocket Zena

Compared 4% of the time

More Rocket Zena Competitors

Control-M vs Stonebranch

Compared 24% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Stonebranch

Compared 15% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Stonebranch

Compared 13% of the time

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Stonebranch

Compared 7% of the time

VisualCron vs Stonebranch

Compared 2% of the time

More Stonebranch Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

JAMS

January 2026

Download JAMS product report

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena

December 2025

Download Rocket Zena product report

Buyer's Guide

Stonebranch

December 2025

Download Stonebranch product report

Also Known As

No data available

ASG-Zena

Stonebranch Universal Automation Center

Interactive Demo

JAMS Software

Demo not available

Rocket Software

Demo not available

Stonebranch

Overview

JAMS is an automation and job scheduling solution designed for workflow optimization, catering to businesses large and small with flexible licensing and integration options.

Offering both Core and Advanced packages, JAMS supports a range of environments from small teams to large-scale operations. Its standout features include integration with platforms like PowerShell, SQL, and SAP, coupled with capabilities such as dependency management and natural language scheduling. JAMS simplifies job management, centralizes workflows, and boosts productivity with its robust automation features. Customizable workflows and insightful logging make it adaptable for diverse needs, supported by responsive customer service ensuring seamless operations.

What are JAMS's key features?

Automation & Scheduling: Flexible automation helps manage complex job schedules efficiently.
Integration: Connects seamlessly with platforms like SQL Server, SAP, and Python for diverse applications.
Centralized Job Management: A unified interface for handling thousands of jobs daily.
Dependency Management: Supports complex workflows with efficient dependency tracking.
Insightful Logging: Provides detailed logs and notifications for precise task execution.

What benefits should users look for in JAMS reviews?

Enhanced Productivity: Automates repetitive tasks, freeing up resources for strategic initiatives.
Scalability: Flexible licensing models grow with business size and needs.
Efficient Workflow Automation: Streamlines job orchestration across environments.
Responsive Support: Helps ensure smooth operations with quick troubleshooting.

In industries, JAMS is employed for automating workflows and managing batch jobs. Organizations utilize it for SSIS, SQL Server tasks, file transfers, and integrating with vendor systems, achieving efficient file automation and data management. Scheduler enables precise execution of thousands of tasks daily, enhancing operational efficiency.

JAMS Software

Rocket Zena offers scheduling and dependency mapping, intuitive interface, and containerized deployment. It simplifies workflow automation, enhancing efficiency across platforms.

Rocket Zena's strengths lie in its scheduling capabilities, graphical interface, and efficient deployment. It supports users in task management with cross-platform scheduling, streamlining repetitive tasks through automation. The web-based client facilitates process visualization and workflow management, while the notification system enhances task handling. Users can manage mainframe, Linux, and Windows environments while integrating with SAP and Oracle, ensuring comprehensive automation and efficient job execution.

What are the key features of Rocket Zena?

Scheduling and Dependency Mapping: Manages tasks efficiently with a graphical interface.
Containerized Deployment: Simplifies deployment and improves efficiency.
FTP Capabilities: Facilitates secure file transfers and backups.
Web-based Client and Whiteboard: Enhances process visualization and control.
Cross-Platform Scheduling: Automates repetitive tasks, reducing manual intervention.

What benefits and ROI should users expect?

Enhanced Efficiency: Automates complex tasks, freeing time for value-added work.
Improved Accuracy: Minimizes manual errors with reliable automation.
Streamlined Task Management: Simplifies workflow with intuitive notification systems.
Easy Integration: Supports SAP, Oracle, and other enterprise platforms.

In industries like finance and manufacturing, Rocket Zena plays a vital role in scheduling batch jobs and automating file transfers. It helps adapt task scheduling to business calendars and integrate with existing platforms, ensuring a smooth workflow that meets business objectives.

Rocket Software

Stonebranch specializes in enterprise automation, excelling in workload scheduling and batch processing across platforms like Linux, Windows, iSeries, and zSeries. This platform offers robust automation, enhancing operational efficiency and supporting digital transformation.

Stonebranch's platform-agnostic capabilities allow organizations to manage and integrate workloads seamlessly. Its Universal Controller is central to task management, offering a web-based interface for flexibility. Users appreciate its stability, with reliable agents facilitating workflow creation without specialized skills. Efficient file transfers and scheduling tools minimize maintenance, supporting diverse tech environments. Though Stonebranch is beneficial, users look for improvements in graphical workflow visibility, finalized API functionalities, and enhanced connectivity with tools like Microsoft SRS. Enhancements in training materials and cloud availability are also desired.

What are the key features of Stonebranch?

Ease of Automation: Simplifies workflow creation with user-friendly interfaces.
Integration Capabilities: Supports diverse platforms, ensuring seamless task management.
Platform-Agnostic Support: Compatible with Linux, Windows, iSeries, and zSeries.
Universal Controller: Centralizes task management for enhanced control.
Reliable Agents: Ensures stable deployment and operation.
Web-Based Interface: Offers flexibility in environment and access.

What benefits should you consider in Stonebranch reviews?

Operational Efficiency: Reduces manual effort with automated processes.
Digital Transformation: Enables complex tasks without specialized skills.
Flexibility: Supports multiple environments and web accessibility.
Centralized Management: Universal Controller simplifies oversight.

Stonebranch finds applications in sectors requiring enterprise automation. Organizations leveraging Linux, Windows, iSeries, and zSeries utilize it for workflow automation, file management, and integrating distributed workloads. It supports tasks like data extraction and analytics, managing thousands of daily operations to enhance visibility and minimize manual interventions.

Stonebranch

Sample Customers

Teradata, Arconic, General Dynamics, Yum!, CVS Health, Comcast, Ghiradelli, & Boston’s Children’s Hospital

Fraternidad Muprespa

Nissan, Coop, United Supermarkets, Groupon, CSC, Orbitz, Johnson & Johnson, BMW, Qantas.

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena vs. Stonebranch

January 2026

Free Report: Rocket Zena vs. Stonebranch

Find out what your peers are saying about Rocket Zena vs. Stonebranch and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,899 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Rocket Zena vs. Stonebranch 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.