We just raised a $30M Series A: Read our story

Compare Automic Workload Automation vs. Control-M

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
OpCon Logo
Read 46 OpCon reviews.
6,081 views|1,259 comparisons
Control-M Logo
29,741 views|13,213 comparisons
Featured Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Automic Workload Automation vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
"Since we got it configured, it has just done the job day in, day out. Being able to rely on it and know that it's going to happen, whether there's a person over it or not, is really good.""Having the jobs laid out while attaching dependencies is a nice addition to the program.""The end code response allows us to evaluate how a process finished, set the termination/end code appropriately, and then trigger further processing based on how it ended.""It seems like it would scale well.""It makes everything simpler. Once OpCon is in, it just repeats itself day after day. We don't have to worry about whether a process will be missed. It will run every single time. We are not dropping jobs or missing stuff. When you have multiple institutions, it's very easy to miss jobs. You get on a roll, start doing things, and then forget somebody. With OpCon, everything is done.""The ability to chain jobs together allows us to create complex interdependencies between our jobs, and the integration into our core system is important because it allows us, through an automated system, to do a huge number of things that used to be done manually.""File Watcher can run jobs when files are made available in a folder.""The biggest example in which OpCon has improved my organization is that we have to download and process files from the federal reserve several times a day. If we don't do it in a certain timeframe, we can be penalized. It's the fact that we can download these files, process them, get our accounting teams the information they need to work the exceptions that is one of the most important roles."

More OpCon Pros »

"It integrates well with the CICD pipeline.""The monitoring and troubleshooting features are rich and with the dashboards and other features, automation work is made easier.""It has its own object-oriented scripting language and you can reload your object in many different places.""Both the stability and the scalability of Automic Workload Automation are great.""The Zero Upgrade feature is the most valuable.""The most valuable features are its robustness, it's highly scalable, and it's easy to implement."

More Automic Workload Automation Pros »

"The most valuable feature is the reporting function. It allows us to pull up reports for specific information that the end-users are looking for.""The scheduling feature and scheduling tool are the most valuable features. I like the scheduling services that we have in Control-M, which are very beneficial to our organization because they are automating things. There is also less manual work. We can schedule a task without any manual interruptions.""Control-M provides us with a unified view, where we can easily define, orchestrate, and monitor all our application workflows and data pipelines. It also provides the ability to filter. So, if I don't want to see everything, I can also narrow it down or open ViewPoint. This is very important since we have thousands of jobs to monitor. If we did not have this ability, it would be very difficult to see what is going on.""Control-M has helped us resolve issues 70% to 80% faster. It provides us with alerts instead of having someone go to that particular server and check the logs to determine where the issue is. We can simply click on the alert information, then everything is in front of us. This provides us with time savings, human effort savings, and process savings.""The integration with ServiceNow is good. When a job ends and there are problems with it, we automatically open an incident in this platform, and the number of the incident is forwarded to Control-M. This means that we have a record of it with the log of the job.""It has a very good GUI. We can search for a job very easily. The web interface, user account creation, and access control are very good. From an access control point of view, we can provide access to as many users as we want. A second group of users can be given a certain number of features, according to the requirements. The web interface is very easy for end users to login and use. A lot of features have been added, e.g., adding jobs. They can add jobs to their stuff, whatever they want, then get it validated by the scheduling team and work it into production.""Its compatibility with the new technologies and platforms, like the Google Cloud or Amazon, is the most valuable. Its console allows us to view the duration and execution of a process. It is also very easy to use and easy to implement.""It provides a unified view where you can orchestrate and monitor all your application workloads and data pipelines. That's very important because with cloud, software as a service, edge computing, traditional data center, and legacy apps, there are all these environments. If you don't have that single pane of glass or that one place to look at, you're going to invest a lot of time and resources into tracking things down when they go wrong."

More Control-M Pros »

Cons
"Of course they have a RESTful API within OpCon, but they have that new web services agent that we installed because we have some SOAP APIs and we had to interact with SMA to get things running. Our developers did do some tweaks, but we have now been able to get some test jobs running, and understand how the workflow goes back and forth.""The solution has quite a learning curve for beginners. It's challenging. I wouldn't rate it as super-easy to automate processes. It's medium-weight. I've used more complex software, but I've used simpler software.""What can get complicated is if you're doing anything more than just the built-in jobs. If you're using the more advanced features, troubleshooting becomes extremely complicated.""The biggest area where there is room for improvement would be integration with their code. They've got a function for embedded scripts and it would be nice if that worked with a code or versioning management system, like GitLab.""There is one feature that has been a difficult problem, and right now, OpCon can't do it. I'm not sure if it should be expected to, but we have tried to get it to where it could start a process on an external database.""The logs are a little daunting to look at the first few times, however, as you begin to understand what you're looking at, it becomes easier.""I have noticed lately that [tech support's] first answers tend to be, "Let's upgrade it to the latest and greatest first," without looking into anything. The last couple of times I've logged a ticket that's been the response, which is a little frustrating. We're not big on just upgrading on a whim. We do full testing.""There is a learning curve. We had to go to class, learn, and take their training classes, then come back. We got assistance from OpCon as well to convert our processes on the Unisys machine over to the IBM. Now, when we add new products, it's pretty straightforward to write a new process and schedule it, then run it at a set time of day."

More OpCon Cons »

"We would like a way to test our cloud-based automations on-premises, and then migrate them to the cloud after they have been tested, without needing an additional license.""This solution's out-of-box automation sets could be improved. They could be industry standardized out-of-box, or even runbook automation processes could be useful—just some plug-and-play automation processes out-of-box. It has many integration capabilities, from APIs to databases, but if the customer sees some out-of-box automation processes in it, it could be useful.""The vendor support is really bad and should be improved.""In most of the packages available, it took time to study and gain knowledge of the features and resources due to poor documentation.""There are some monitoring features that could be added.""Its dashboard can be improved. In version 12, they have already moved to a web-based interface from a UI. We are looking into this feature now. We are also looking for available APIs that we can use to interface the engine into our other systems. There should be a subservice facility that we can use to interface with Microsoft Teams and send out authorization on job executions. We have seen a feature like this in other products that we are looking into."

More Automic Workload Automation Cons »

"Its architecture is old. AutoSys gives more flexibility.""There is definitely room for improvement. Version 9.0.20 actually comes with a web-based interface, but there are still a lot of things unavailable with it. There will eventually be more inclusions added into the web interface, but there is still a long way to go.""The reporting functionality needs a lot of work. We have faced problems with different versions where we run the right report, but it gives us blank entries. Then, when we run the same report again, it gives the correct data.""While they have a very good reporting facility, the reports that I'm asked to produce, a lot of times aren't necessarily what we need.""We've also had a few database bugs within our organization. I think we are migrating to OpenJDK rather than just regular Java and that has since shown some issues with our Control-M instance, timing out and causing our jobs to stop running. We are still working with BMC to fine-tune that and get that resolved.""A lot of businesses are using ServiceNow, which is another tool. I would like there to be some integration with ServiceNow or other third-party tools as well as have easily available integrations. Right now, we need to write scripts. Apart from that, if there were some integrations with an ITSM tool, then that would be good. Because at the end of the day, most of our clients are using different ITSM tools. I know that BMC Remedy is easy to integrate with Control-M. However, if there was availability for Jira as well as other ITSM and DevOps tools, that would be a good improvement.""The high availability that comes from BMC with its supplied Postgres database is very limited. Even using your customer-supplied Postgres database is problematic. We have engaged with them regarding this, but it is difficult. My company doesn't want to do this and BMC doesn't want to do that. We just need to find some middle ground to get the proper high availability. We're also moving away, like the rest of the world, from the more expensive offerings, like Oracle. We are trying to use Postgres, which is free. The stability is good. It is just that the high availability configuration is not ideal. It could be better.""A Control-M on-prem license is based on the number of jobs, which is the number of tasks a particular customer wants to have. These tasks have to be run within 24 hours window. For example, if you have a license for 100 jobs, you can run a maximum of 100 jobs in a 24-hour window. If your operations could not run 10 jobs, and they ran only 90 jobs, they just carry over to the next day, but the next day, they will have 110 jobs. Control-M asks you to buy those 10 more licenses because you were out of compliance in terms of the number of licenses. This is something that needs to be indicated in Control-M GUI so that customers know the number of licenses they're going to use in this time window. Their support and documentation should be improved. I am not that satisfied with their customer support. Sometimes, they don't have the answers. Their documentation is very poor. It is not well written, and it is not in a very logical manner. You can use it on Unix, Linux, Windows, and AIX, but it needs some improvement on iSeries. It needs a built-in mechanism inside the system to give you an option to restore from the last point of failure. If a process crashes, the Control-M needs to have a mechanism in iSeries where the process can be restored from the last point of failure."

More Control-M Cons »

Pricing and Cost Advice
"Our annual maintenance costs are $45,000. The initial cost is separate.""Yearly, it's around $30,000.""Scaling is pricey.""Compared to AutoSys and ISE, OpCon was a lot cheaper to put in. AutoSys is hundreds of thousands of dollars to just install it because they don't have an interface into our system. You have to teach them what your system does.""I believe our cost is about $150,000 annually.""SMA is big on free training. They do monthly training down at their headquarter office. As long as you own the product, the only thing you pay for is your employees' travel expenses. The training is free. They are willing to train people and give them the knowledge. That way, you are equipped to do what you need to do.""On a yearly basis our cost is between $25,000 and $30,000.""Yearly, we're paying about $62,000. OpCon has an all-inclusive feature and module license, but you pay per task."

More OpCon Pricing and Cost Advice »

"There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.""It costs too much. That's why we are now looking at other products.""There are different licensing fees for cases where high availability is important.""They have changed the pricing on their licensing, and it's cheaper than before."

More Automic Workload Automation Pricing and Cost Advice »

"Pricing varies depending on which components and modules you are using.""The cost is basically $100 a job, give or take.""This is an area where it is a little difficult to work with BMC. They want to do licenses by job, which is what we have. For example, the simplest is to license by job, but they can also license by nodes. While the licensing is simple to use, it might not be the correct licensing model for the customer. It is okay because we want to license by job, which is something measurable. At the end of the day, licensing by job is the most important.""Initially, our licensing model was based on the number of jobs per day. That caused some issues because we were restricted to a number. So at our renewal time we said, 'We want to convert from number of jobs to number of endpoints.' That cost us extra money but it gave us additional capabilities, without worrying about the number of jobs.""Its pricing and licensing could be a little bit better. Based on my experience and discussions with other existing customers, everybody feels that the regular Managed File Transfer piece, not the enterprise one, is a little overpriced, especially for folks who already have licensed Advanced File Transfer. We understand that Advanced File Transfer is going away and is going to be the end of life, and there is some additional functionality built into MFT, but the additional functionality does not really correlate with the huge price increase over what we're paying for AFT already. This has actually driven a lot of people to look for alternative solutions.""This is now from my previous years as support for banks and big companies. If it's not enterprise scale, I find that it's too expensive for smaller companies. You really have to be quite big and need to have a dedicated support staff to run it, then you'll be fine. What we've seen at smaller companies, it's too expensive because they want to automate everything. Now, stuff that can literally run once a day for the rest of their lives is costing them $3 a job a day. It becomes too expensive, eventually. They are not seeing the return on investment because it's not business critical. Nobody is going to die or they're going to lose money if that job didn't run exactly at 11 minutes past 4:00. It's definitely for bigger enterprise companies, especially banks or healthcare providers. We have had an instance where Control-M was unavailable due to external factors for 20 minutes and there was a loss of almost a million euros because the solution involved logistics.""You're going to spend a lot of money upfront, but the benefits you're going to get out of it are going to quickly pay for it.""BMC's price is based on the number of jobs."

More Control-M Pricing and Cost Advice »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Questions from the Community
Top Answer: Often times there are criteria that cannot be determined by the system, which allows a human to make the determination… more »
Top Answer: This tool, like any other quality product, fits the idea of "You get what you pay for." The SMA Technologies consultants… more »
Top Answer: The products are extremely powerful and capable. Anytime you have such capability, the programming/configuration that… more »
Top Answer: The monitoring and troubleshooting features are rich and with the dashboards and other features, automation work is made… more »
Top Answer: There are different licensing fees for cases where high availability is important. There is also a certain complexity in… more »
Top Answer: We found that some Actions Packs and plugins do not have documentation, are incomplete, or are of poor quality. In most… more »
Top Answer: Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful… more »
Top Answer: Hi! I don't know the "Oracle DAC Scheduler", but I can say that in most competitive solutions Control-m stands out in… more »
Top Answer: Control-M has helped to improve our data transfers because it allows us to monitor the execution of the process. With… more »
Comparisons
Also Known As
Automic Dollar Universe
Control M
Learn More
Overview

OpCon is a robust and flexible platform capable of scaling up to meet the needs of clients running 140,000+ daily jobs across multiple environments and operating systems. Our proven migration framework helps clients painlessly transition from outdated or cost inefficient platforms thanks to our deep organizational expertise, REST API, and extensive library of legacy connectors. We have a variety of consulting options available for clients and offer no-cost training for the life of the contract.

Deliver the fully agile enterprise using CA Automic Workload Automation 

The modern enterprise needs to orchestrate a complex, diverse landscape of applications, platforms and technologies. Workload automation can prove a critical differentiator, but only if it provides intelligent automation driven by data analytics.

The IT landscape is currently more complex than ever: Islands of automation are a barrier to scaling and standardizing your workload activities. Processing errors are common because of manual handoffs. And the lack of an end-to-end view of the business process make inefficiencies and problems difficult to resolve. In addition to this, you are operating 24x7 and cannot find maintenance windows to upgrade your infrastructure in order to innovate. 

CA Automic Workload Automation gives you the agility, speed, visibility and scalability needed to respond to the constantly changing technology landscape. It centrally manages and automates the execution of business processes end-to-end; across mainframe, cloud and hybrid environments in a way that never stops—even when doing an upgrade to the next version.

Control-M simplifies application and data workflow orchestration on premises or as a service. It makes it easy to build, define, schedule, manage, and monitor production workflows, ensuring visibility, reliability, and improving SLAs.

  • Accelerate new business applications into production—by embedding workflow orchestration into your CI/CD pipeline
  • Scale Dev and Ops collaboration, with a Jobs-as-Code approach
  • Simplify workflows across hybrid and multi-cloud environments with AWS, Azure and Google Cloud Platform integrations
  • Deliver data-driven outcomes faster, managing big data workflows in a scalable way
  • Take control of your file transfer operations with integrated, intelligent file movement and visibility
Offer
Accel­er­ate dig­i­tal trans­for­ma­tion through work­load automation

Automate repetitive tasks so you can focus on projects that drive your business forward. Find out how OpCon workload automation enables you to create repeatable, reliable workflows - all managed from a single platform.

Learn more about Automic Workload Automation
Learn more about Control-M
Sample Customers
LOHR, Carnival Cruise Lines, Herbalife, Digital Federal Credit Union, Synergent, Frandsen Bank & Trust
ING, Adidas, 84.51, ESB
CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm78%
Insurance Company8%
Government4%
Manufacturing Company2%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company27%
Financial Services Firm18%
Insurance Company10%
Comms Service Provider9%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm34%
Manufacturing Company15%
Retailer9%
Insurance Company9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company34%
Financial Services Firm12%
Comms Service Provider11%
Insurance Company5%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm35%
Computer Software Company12%
Retailer8%
Transportation Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Computer Software Company38%
Financial Services Firm14%
Comms Service Provider11%
Insurance Company7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business26%
Midsize Enterprise43%
Large Enterprise31%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business56%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise23%
REVIEWERS
Small Business15%
Midsize Enterprise21%
Large Enterprise65%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business5%
Midsize Enterprise9%
Large Enterprise86%
REVIEWERS
Small Business13%
Midsize Enterprise11%
Large Enterprise76%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business10%
Midsize Enterprise8%
Large Enterprise82%
Find out what your peers are saying about Automic Workload Automation vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: November 2021.
554,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Automic Workload Automation is ranked 5th in Workload Automation with 6 reviews while Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 36 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while Control-M is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "Good integration, responsive support, and a short learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Control-M writes "Allows us to integrate file transfers more readily, resolve issues quickly, and orchestrate a diverse landscape of vendor products". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, AppWorx Workload Automation, ActiveBatch Workload Automation and MOVEit, whereas Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, ActiveBatch Workload Automation, ASG-Zena and Redwood Business Process Automation - Workload Edition. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. Control-M 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.