Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Azure Automation vs Control-M comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 13, 2026

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Azure Automation
Ranking in Process Automation
25th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Control-M
Ranking in Process Automation
2nd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
183
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (2nd), Workload Automation (1st), AI IT Support (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Process Automation category, the mindshare of Azure Automation is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 3.7%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Process Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Control-M3.7%
Azure Automation1.0%
Other95.3%
Process Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Gökhan YENİGÜN - PeerSpot reviewer
Microsoft Azure Technical Consultant at Gsy Bilişim
Has improved workflow automation and reduced manual tasks while offering room for simpler deployment
Azure Automation brings many benefits to my company and my customers' companies because many jobs can be converted automatically through an AI agent to complete tasks. PowerShell and Python scripting capabilities assist us significantly in developing tailored automation at 90% efficiency. I have utilized Azure Automation runbooks. We don't create new runbooks because some runbook templates simplify our business processes and tasks effectively.
RP
Batch Admin at NBC Universal
Brings data together from multiple platforms and optimizes cross-environment orchestration
The features of Control-M that I like the most include the ability to easily integrate or bring in different platforms into Control-M. For instance, AWS, mainframe, TWS, and something that's running on Autosys can all be brought into Control-M, converted to how Control-M runs it, and then the batch can be executed. This centralizes various applications in Control-M, which doesn't just have to handle batch processes, but also other tasks like reporting on required data. I find this functionality very useful and the setup is impressive, with more advancements yet to come. With Control-M, my company has achieved several measurable improvements since I started. The metrics indicate that the number of failures has dropped, and we have addressed the issue of excessive false alerts that I encountered when I joined. Previously, we received an overwhelming number of alerts daily, but now we manage to maintain that at a normalized level, perhaps around five to fifteen alerts, depending on running core batches and their setup.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The best features of Azure Automation help us automate tasks for the customer and eliminate a significant amount of manual work."
"Azure Automation brings many benefits to my company and my customers' companies because many jobs can be converted automatically through an AI agent to complete tasks."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Automation is the scripting."
"The most valuable part of Azure Automation is that it is a platform providing features that can be custom-used, with very wide functionalities, and the user-friendly nature and available technology can be simply applied to different technologies."
"We use Control-M for maintenance on our Oracle and SQL Server databases. It automates maintenance on packages, including standard procedures on the databases themselves, snapshots, checking integrity, verifying the RDBMS of the databases, etc. It ensures they aren't clogged and that they are running smoothly and that there aren't any jobs stuck, eating up the performance of the server or any of the CPU cores."
"The GUI is good if I'm comparing it to other scheduling products."
"The most effective feature of Control-M is the API integration."
"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."
"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 best features of Control-M include the fact that you can easily connect different platforms—for anybody coming to it, if you needed to script a solution that connected Windows and Unix and mainframe, that would be difficult, but with Control-M, you can just sit back and connect a COBOL program running on the mainframe, trigger something on the Windows platform, then do a file transfer on Linux, and that's all basically just drag and drop."
"Automation of the batch jobs is the most valuable feature."
"It helps us meet our service-level agreements. It is integrated into our CI/CD pipeline. It enhances our operational productivity."
 

Cons

"Deployment with Azure Automation can be challenging at times, though sometimes it is very easy."
"Sometimes when integrating with third-party tools, we cannot find the proper API and must perform manual work, which requires additional development on our end."
"The solution’s user interface could be improved."
"Pricing and licensing for Control-M are challenging aspects."
"We develop software. More frequently, we are working with microservices and APIs, using our integration tool, MuleSoft. While Control-M is really a good tool to integrate with other tools, it is important for them to continue improving their microservices and API."
"I would like not to have to reach out to a third-party application company to do automated notifications. Right now, we still have people manually calling people and emailing people. There's a company called xMatters - and there are others - that has an API through Control-M that can automate any aspect of failure management. I'd like to see it build right into the product. I'd like to see a better notification product."
"The licensing cost can be improved."
"You need to pay for extra features if you need them."
"It can be very labor-intensive to get this information out."
"Its architecture is old. AutoSys gives more flexibility."
"Control-M reporting isn't that good. It is very limited. We would like the ability to create our own reports as well as the ability to publish dashboards in the cloud, which would help us. Improved reporting will help us determine statuses and get the answers that we need. However, I personally think BMC is not focusing on the reporting. I have even visited the BMC office in India, and asked, "Why haven't you improved the reporting?""
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The license model is based on the number of jobs we run on the SaaS application or the number of executions, unlike the on-premise model options. If we have a handful of jobs, it's always good to consider Control-M, but if it's a large number of jobs, Control-M might not be a great option."
"They are expensive. If we were a small company, it would be complicated because we have to have strong sales and operations to be able to afford a tool of this level. Being a large company, the cost-benefit is covered, but it is not within the level of cheap solutions."
"It is an expensive solution."
"BMC does NOT have a great licensing model from my perspective."
"We are paying way more for Control-M than we've paid for any of our other scheduling tools."
"Compare to other tools Pricing and licensing was more. It should be decrease."
"There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."
"The cost of the hardware is high. Because you need to license each job, it is costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Process Automation solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
6%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business37
Midsize Enterprise23
Large Enterprise140
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Azure Automation?
Deployment with Azure Automation can be challenging at times, though sometimes it is very easy. In terms of deployment installation, it requires improvement to be less complicated.
What is your primary use case for Azure Automation?
The typical use cases for Azure Automation are business automations, workflows for virtual machines or cloud environments, and automatic triggers for workflows, which we are currently using.
What advice do you have for others considering Azure Automation?
I'm working with various products. I am familiar with Azure Marketplace and Azure Automation, including Language Understanding. It takes a couple of hours for my team to deploy the product, though ...
How does Control-M compare with AutoSys Workload Automation?
Control-M acts as a single, centralized interface for monitoring and managing all batch processes, which is helpful because nothing gets left unattended since it is all visible in one place, and th...
What do you like most about Control-M?
First of all, the shift from manual to automation has been valuable. We have a tool that can automate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Control-M?
From what I know about pricing, I would probably put Control-M in the expensive category, but you do pay for what you get; you are paying for a premium product.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Adobe 2. BMW 3. Coca-Cola 4. General Electric 5. Johnson & Johnson 6. NBCUniversal 7. Pfizer 8. Samsung 9. Siemens 10. Toyota 11. Verizon 12. 3M 13. Accenture 14. Airbus 15. Allianz 16. American Express 17. AT&T 18. Bank of America 19. Boeing 20. Cisco 21. Dell 22. ExxonMobil 23. Ford 24. General Motors 25. IBM 26. Intel 27. JPMorgan Chase 28. Microsoft (self-use) 29. Nestle 30. Procter & Gamble 31. Shell 32. Walmart
The Bank of East Asia, LINE Bank Taiwan, Coop, Air Europa, Carrefour, Itau Unibanco, Snam, Embraer, ANZ Bank, EDP, Dominio's, Tampa General Hospital, W&W Informatik GmbH, Veterans General, Up Sí Vale, Sky Italia, REWE digital GmbH, Raymond James, Railinc, Navistar, Management Science Associates, Colruyt, CARFAX, Banpara, Aspiag Service, Amadeus, AG Insurance, ING Bank Slaski
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Automation vs. Control-M and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.