Stonebranch vs Tidal by Redwood comparison

Stonebranch and Tidal Software by Redwood are both solutions in the Workload Automation category. Stonebranch is ranked #10 with an average rating of 9.5, while Tidal Software by Redwood is ranked #19. Stonebranch holds a 4.6% mindshare in WA, compared to Tidal Software by Redwood’s 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 94% 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 882,744 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 February 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of JAMS is 2.8%, up from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Stonebranch is 4.6%, down from 5.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Tidal by Redwood is 4.5%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Workload Automation Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
JAMS	2.8%
Stonebranch	4.6%
Tidal by Redwood	4.5%
Other	88.1%

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 improved our productivity immensely because everything flows. I don't think we could operate at our current staffing levels without it."

"The fact that we no longer need to use Excel spreadsheets is huge. Before JAMS, every group was keeping track of their own batch jobs. Nobody really knew what the other jobs were. So, if jobs failed, other groups wouldn't necessarily know. With JAMS, everything is done through a single scheduler. You can choose who to notify."

"The scheduling and execution of jobs are the most valuable features. The scheduling is important because if there is a task we want to execute at 4:00 AM, there's no way we will have someone who can manually run the job. In addition, we execute 100 to 200 jobs per day, and manual intervention is not an option."

"JAMS is easier to use and cheaper than our previous solution. The installation is more straightforward, and JAMS has a graphical user interface, so it's more accessible."

"Fortra's JAMS helped us centralize job management across our platforms and applications. This is critical because we schedule tasks across multiple applications and operating systems, using triggers and start dates to coordinate their execution."

"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."

"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."

"It makes everything that we want to do so much easier. We have had a number of instances in the past where we have had developers who have been working on a project, and even though we have had JAMS for all these years, they will create some SQL Server Agent job, or something like that, to run a task. When it is in code review and development is complete, the question always comes around, "Can JAMS do this?" The answer has always been, "Yes." Pretty much anything we have ever developed could be run by JAMS."

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."

"The tasks are incredibly capable, and as long as you name them with a nice, uniform naming convention, they are very useful. You can create some interesting workflows through various machines, or you can just have it kick off single tasks. All in all, I really like the Universal Task. You can do some mutually exclusive stuff, such as an "A not B" kind of thing. It has a lot of capabilities behind the scenes."

"I have found the agents to be so much simpler, when compared to ESP."

"I like the dashboard and the various workflows."

"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."

"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."

"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"

More Stonebranch pros

"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."

"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."

"With other tools, you do not have the ability to schedule jobs on their own. You need to create a group and then assign everything to that group. Only then will the job be able to execute. In Tidal, you can schedule a single job and there is no need to create a group. That's what I like the most."

"For us, the calendaring system is very robust. Some of the teams have very specific requests for when they need jobs to run. That's been really valuable, because a lot of times, when people run scripts, if they run on a holiday, they're going to fail... A couple of times a month it probably saves us work and the necessity of logging in from home and checking to make sure everything's okay."

"Tidal Automation is very efficient and can quickly automate most manual and repetitive tasks."

"We have to run about 12,000 jobs every day and the majority of them need to be launched from our ERP, JD Edwards. The native compatibility of the Tidal platform with JD Edwards dovetails with our greatest need. It's directly connected to the heart of our IT system. We couldn't work without it."

"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."

"Tidal Automation allows organizations to automate complex workflows and processes, reducing the need for manual intervention and improving operational efficiency."

More Tidal by Redwood pros

Cons

"If there were a softcover book on how to really take advantage of all of JAMS' tools, I would buy it. I do better with training books than online searching, so a book would be helpful."

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

"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."

"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 ACL or access permission area needs to be improved. When it comes to defining and providing security permissions, it's a bit confusing if you are new to JAMS. JAMS needs to improve the features for security access or permissions."

"The documentation is not super... It's not as quick and slick as I'd like it to be."

"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."

"Improvements could be made in the service desk's knowledge and communication skills among engineers to better address customer needs and ensure issues are fully resolved."

More JAMS cons

"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."

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

"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 would be ideal if they had the exact same features as the CA Workload Automation DE series. It would be helpful to have calendaring options."

"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."

"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."

More Stonebranch cons

"From an administrative point of view, I wouldn't give really high marks to the solution. I actually entertained getting the JAWS application at one point. One of the shortcomings with the scheduler is the reporting capabilities. At least at the time, JAWS was the best that they had for a third-party integration. I think they've got things in the pipeline to help alleviate that gap."

"It takes a lot of time to learn the product. I have admins and developers who are working on the products for the last three to four years and still don't know all the functionalities. Tidal has really great things about it, but people are focused on their day-to-day job and the solution is not intuitive."

"The solution needs more advanced reporting and data visualization capabilities to enable deeper analysis of job performance and trends."

"The user interface is the place that needs the most work. If and when we find issues with the product, they are usually in that area. If I had to choose, that's where I'd want issues, as opposed to in the engine. But the UI is average. It's a little sluggish at times and there are some bugs in it."

"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."

"One of the weaknesses of the product is, when something happens, it's difficult to find out the root cause. There are a lot of logs you can take a look at in Tidal. Sometimes, they are useful, but other times, they're not. That is mostly relegated to the administrative team. Users for the most part don't see that and don't know anything about that. They just know they have a problem, then it's up to the administrative team to see what happened and figure out the problem."

"The drill-down into details using the Graphical Views feature is a bit difficult and not that helpful. If you want to go into the details, you have to go to the Job Activity. Graphical Views is not that easy for getting that kind of information."

"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."

More Tidal by Redwood cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"This is a good product at a fair 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."

"Fortra's JAMS pricing structure has deteriorated significantly since its acquisition by Fortra."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"I haven't been involved in the financial side for several years, but we buy one host and unlimited agents, and we get a reasonable price for that. We're happy with the amount we pay and the scalability it provides."

More JAMS pricing and cost advice

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

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

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

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

"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 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 annual maintenance cost is competitive for what we have and what they do."

"If you are willing to shop around to other vendors, you can possibly get a good price on your support license."

"The solution’s licensing model in terms of its flexibility and transparency regarding costs is pretty good. A person can buy the license, and if you decide to stop support, you can do that but still have the product. So, it's not like you're paying constantly to keep that license alive. Certainly, you want to keep support going too. Once you buy it, you own it. It's not like I have to keep paying somebody to keep using it."

"We think the pricing is very fair. We have been happy with the pricing compared to some of the other solutions in the space."

"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."

"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."

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

882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Insurance Company

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

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	19

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	1
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	25

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 16% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs JAMS

Compared 9% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs JAMS

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs JAMS

Compared 7% of the time

IBM Workload Automation vs JAMS

Compared 5% of the time

More JAMS Competitors

Control-M vs Stonebranch

Compared 25% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Stonebranch

Compared 18% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Stonebranch

Compared 9% of the time

Automic Automation vs Stonebranch

Compared 6% of the time

ESP Workload Automation Intelligence vs Stonebranch

Compared 3% of the time

More Stonebranch Competitors

MuleSoft Anypoint Platform vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 21% of the time

Control-M vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 12% of the time

Automic Automation vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 7% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 7% of the time

ESP Workload Automation Intelligence vs Tidal by Redwood

Compared 2% of the time

More Tidal by Redwood Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

JAMS

February 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

882,744 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.