Stonebranch vs Tidal by Redwood comparison

Stonebranch and Tidal Software by Redwood are both solutions in the Workload Automation category. Stonebranch is ranked #9 with an average rating of 10.0, while Tidal Software by Redwood is ranked #20. Stonebranch holds a 4.4% mindshare in WA, compared to Tidal Software by Redwood’s 4.6% mindshare. Additionally, 93% of Stonebranch users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 97% of Tidal Software by Redwood users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Tidal by Redwood and Stonebranch are contenders in the job scheduling and automation software category. Tidal by Redwood seems to have the upper hand due to its powerful permissions system and extensive feedback praising its web client.

Features: Tidal offers robust calendaring and job scheduling with complex dependency handling, which effectively manages over 100,000 jobs daily. It also includes advanced segmentation features for user control across platforms. Stonebranch is praised for reliable agents and multi-technology flexibility. Its task operation array supports detailed process control, benefiting digital transformation.

Room for Improvement: Tidal users call for improved reporting, particularly for monitoring failures, along with a more intuitive interface for cloud support and handling long-duration tasks. There's also a need for better learning resources. Stonebranch needs enhancements in FTP tasks and PGP encryption, better integration with internal tools, mobile interface options, and mainframe agent improvements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Tidal operates mainly on-premises, with responsive and knowledgeable support praised since its transition from Cisco to STA Group. Stonebranch offers exceptional technical support across platforms, with knowledgeable staff and fast responses that extend beyond payment obligations, ensuring smooth tool integration.

Pricing and ROI: Tidal's flexible licensing model is appreciated for unrestricted agent use and budget-friendly enterprise agreements, boosting productivity and saving costs. Stonebranch is seen as competitively priced, offering value with its transaction-based licensing model, helping meet workload management needs within budget and providing a positive ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Stonebranch vs. Tidal by Redwood Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Stonebranch vs. Tidal by Redwood

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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 Stonebranch is 4.4%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tidal by Redwood is 4.6%, up from 3.0% 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%
Tidal by Redwood	4.6%
Other	88.4%

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

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

Jim Gillingham

Batch Production Manager at a consultancy with 201-500 employees

Its versatility, ease of use, scalability, and cost-effectiveness make it a 10/10 and the best of the breed

The company is not really big. One of the areas that they are working on is improving the process of migrating jobs from the lower environment to the upper environment. They had used a tool called Transporter, which was a little difficult to use, but they've now released a new tool in August, which I've not yet used, to do that. It's probably called Repository or something like that, but it's a tool for migrating jobs from the lower environment to the upper environment. That's where they needed to improve, and it looks like they may have, but I haven't tried the tool yet. They can do better reporting in terms of production statistics reporting.

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

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

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

"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."

"JAMS has helped save IT staff time by automating tasks previously performed with scripts, and its scheduling feature has been particularly useful."

"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."

"We also use the solution’s Interactive Agents. If we need to push something to our dealer portal, we can just drop a file in a folder and it goes. Running interactive tasks helps me users focus on business processes since I don’t have to take care of running the jobs manually."

"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."

"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."

More JAMS pros

"The interface is very user-friendly and easy to navigate."

"The most valuable feature is the reliability of the agents, because we need them accessible and we need to run stuff. The agent technology and compatibility are top-notch."

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

"We like that it has GUI and is not just a command line."

"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."

"I like the dashboard and the various workflows."

"The support is good from Stonebranch Universal Automation Center."

"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."

More Stonebranch pros

"We use the solution for cross-platform, cross-application workloads. The solution’s ability to manage and monitor these workloads is very easy and accurate. We have file dependencies for running jobs. The job does not start until a file exists on a completely different server, then where the job will run. So, it is cross systems."

"The data management on offer was valuable."

"The feature that I find to be valuable, as I'm working with other folks, is the ability to cross-schedule across platforms, and the flexibility that comes with that."

"One of the most useful features is being able to set up a schedule and create dependencies. The calendar can kick off processes at certain times, based on dependencies that you specify, like time, or whether another process has finished. Dependencies are the most useful thing."

"We wouldn't be able to do many of the complex scheduling that we do today without it. For us, it is a mission-critical app. Because if it doesn't work or has a problem, then SAP doesn't function. It is that critical. So, it's an essential tool for us to manage and run SAP jobs."

"The versatility of being able to run on many different types of servers is valuable. There is also a versatility of different services that you could run jobs on. It's highly versatile. You can run a lot of different types of scripts on a lot of different types of servers. It interfaces with all of them."

"Tidal Automation by Redwood is a user-friendly solution."

"It's the most efficient tool in doing repetitive tasks and saves a lot of time with minimum possibility of error."

More Tidal by Redwood pros

Cons

"If around 5,000 or more jobs run at a time, JAMS slows down, and we have to wait around five to 10 minutes or restart JAMS scheduler services."

"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."

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

"JAMS lacks source control features. Our previous solution had job control language, but JAMS doesn't. When migrating between versions, JAMS doesn't migrate all the data, like job change history, etc. Also, the scheduler doesn't have a way to make jobs invisible, so you can temporarily turn a job off if you decide not to run it today."

"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."

"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."

"I want JAMS to implement a global search function."

"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."

More JAMS cons

"Stonebranch Universal Automation Center could improve the analytics."

"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."

"I feel that Stonebranch can be improved in certain areas."

"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."

"I would rate Stonebranch somewhere in the middle for ease of setup. It wasn't too straightforward for us because our infrastructure is complex."

"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."

"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."

"It can't handle negative written codes."

More Stonebranch cons

"Their software installation and update process could use some improvements. I'm pretty sure they're working on that, but that's definitely an area where it could be streamlined a lot. There's still a lot of manual work that you have to do with the schedule when you deploy masters or do the agents."

"I'm still hoping with Explorer to be able to see end-to-end job streams. That's not really something that's easy to see today in the web client. However, I haven't worked with Explorer yet. One of the things that we have found frustrating is not being able to see an end-to-end job stream across multiple applications within Tidal. We use jobs for that right now, but I have high hopes that we'll be able to see that in Explorer."

"I don't know if Tidal wants to get into the business of monitoring long-running jobs, but that could be a feature for the future: a job launching and monitoring tool. Using Tidal for monitoring doesn't seem like a good fit, but if they could offer something that did that as an add-on or include it, it might be helpful."

"With the client, we have had certain issues. The user interface for Tidal is a little slow. A lot of people would love this tool if they had a faster user interface. The drill-down functionality should be much quicker than what it is pulling out now. If I fill out some data, then it takes awhile to get that data back onto the screen. It's not as fast as we were expecting."

"When we patch to the next version, there is often a little thing that breaks. It has rarely been a big deal, but I always seem to have to follow up on one tiny issue. It would help if they had some better QA testing of their patches."

"The biggest improvement they need to work on is doing better QA checks before they release new patches and service packs. We do find that you can't trust getting the new product right away, as they have to get some bug fixes out. They do tend to have some bugs in the first iteration."

"Tidal's adaptability and user-friendliness could be increased by integrating it with additional programmes and platforms."

"They can do better reporting in terms of production statistics reporting."

More Tidal by Redwood cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For what it does, the product is priced very well."

"There are no additional costs other than the license for Fortra's JAMS which is affordable."

"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."

"It's expensive, to be honest, but it does the job."

"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."

"Our licensing is pretty cheap because we have a state solution. So, we pay only $1,000 a year."

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

"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."

More JAMS pricing and cost advice

"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."

"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."

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

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

"The solution enables admins and users to see the information relevant to them, but this is bundled as an add-on that we would have to pay for."

"The price is reasonable in terms of the product’s functionality."

"Our licensing model for Tidal is on an annual basis. It is very good and works well for us. Tidal's licensing is very transparent and simple. It lets you know, for the amount you use, that's the price that you pay. So, we buy X number of licenses, and we know that this is where we are. I'm very happy with that. I saw the licensing modules on other platforms, and I didn't like them. Other companies and solutions would calculate the connections, adapters, and instances. I think that's the reason that BMC was pretty expensive: They just didn't understand what our needs are."

"There are project, system, and server costs. Some of the things that they are doing is introducing new products. They are introducing what they call their Repository, which is a way for you to move a job. That doesn't cost anything to us, because it is reusing a tool called Transporter. The repository is the successor to Transporter, so we already own it and are sort of grandfathered in. But that new product requires a server and database, so now we have to go out and get a server and database. So, there is a cost there."

"The new prices that we've received seem reasonable and comparable to the marketplace."

"...it is a pretty affordable scheduler tool that lets us do a lot. You get a lot of bang for the buck... The licensing model is hugely flexible."

"Our yearly licensing costs are between $10,000 to $20,000. They have always been reasonable with us. I like that non-production licensing is about half the cost of production licensing. Licensing is by adapter typically. We have had scenarios where we have had to take an adapter from one environment to another, and they've allowed us to do that. They have made it a very reasonable process. There's definitely a feeling that they will work with you."

"The pricing is pretty reasonable. That seems to help a lot versus other companies. There are no other fees aside from the standard licensing fees. There are other products out there where you pay based on how many jobs you run and so on, and I know that's very frustrating for users."

More Tidal by Redwood pricing and cost advice

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

23%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Performing Arts

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	1
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	23

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	38

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

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Stonebranch Universal Automation Center?

My experience with the pricing, setup cost, and licensing of Stonebranch has been that it is a very affordable tool, ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Stonebranch Universal Automation Center?

Stonebranch can be improved by making it more familiar to other tech geeks. We can add various other features such as...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Stonebranch Universal Automation Center?

My main use case for Stonebranch is for job scheduling and to see the workflows and for troubleshooting any failures....

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Control-M vs JAMS

Compared 18% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs JAMS

Compared 10% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs JAMS

Compared 9% of the time

Automic Automation vs JAMS

Compared 7% of the time

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs JAMS

Compared 4% of the time

More JAMS Competitors

Control-M vs Stonebranch

Compared 26% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Stonebranch

Compared 16% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Stonebranch

Compared 12% of the time

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Stonebranch

Compared 7% of the time

ESP Workload Automation Intelligence vs Stonebranch

Compared 4% of the time

More Stonebranch Competitors

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 23% of the time

Control-M vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 13% of the time

Automic Automation vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 8% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 7% of the time

OpCon vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 2% of the time

More Tidal by Redwood Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

JAMS

January 2026

Download JAMS product report

Buyer's Guide

Stonebranch

January 2026

Download Stonebranch product report

Buyer's Guide

Tidal by Redwood

January 2026

Download Tidal by Redwood product report

Also Known As

No data available

Stonebranch Universal Automation Center

Tidal Workload Automation, Cisco Workload Automation, Tidal Enterprise Scheduler

Interactive Demo

JAMS Software

Demo not available

Stonebranch

Demo not available

Tidal Software by Redwood

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

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

Tidal Software is a leading provider of enterprise workload automation solutions that orchestrate the execution of complex workflows across systems, applications and IT environments. With a comprehensive portfolio of products and services, Tidal optimizes mission-critical business processes, increases IT cost efficiencies and satisfies legal and regulatory compliance requirements. Hundreds of customers around the world count on Tidal for modernizing their workload automation and driving their digital transformation. Tidal Software is headquartered in Chicago with offices in Houston, London, Minsk, Belarus and Chennai, India. For more information, visit tidalsoftware.com.

Tidal Software by Redwood

Sample Customers

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

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

Information Not Available

Buyer's Guide

Stonebranch vs. Tidal by Redwood

January 2026

Free Report: Stonebranch vs. Tidal by Redwood

Find out what your peers are saying about Stonebranch vs. Tidal by Redwood and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Stonebranch vs. Tidal by Redwood 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.