Control-M and Camunda operate within the workflow automation category. While Control-M is suitable for larger enterprises due to its robust integration capabilities and comprehensive support, Camunda seems to have an edge in flexibility and cost-effectiveness for developers.
Features: Control-M provides extensive integration capabilities, making it apt for banking environments where secure processing is essential. Its ability to manage workflows across different platforms with ease is highly valued, alongside robust processing that adds to its appeal. Camunda is recognized for its developer-friendly approach with outstanding open-source features. It adheres to BPMN standards and offers flexibility in modeling processes, which is seen as a huge plus. Additionally, it supports a variety of programming languages and microservices.
Room for Improvement: Control-M can enhance its reporting functionalities and improve integration for dynamic job types. Additionally, adjustments in cost customization and license management could provide more flexibility to users. Camunda, while cost-effective, could work on improving user interface options for low-code development to better meet the needs of complex enterprise environments.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Control-M is praised for its deployment flexibility in both cloud and on-premises environments, along with reputable customer support, although there is a call for enhanced holistic system support. Camunda's open-source availability and strong community support make it versatile, yet timely enterprise support could be improved for quicker resolutions.
Pricing and ROI: Control-M is often perceived as costly, fit for larger enterprises due to its extensive capabilities that justify the price through operational efficiency and increased ROI. On the other hand, Camunda offers an open-source model and is noted for its cost-effectiveness even in paid versions, providing scalable features at a competitive price.
The main return on investment with Helix Control-M has been a reduction in downtime and minimization of manual interventions, which has improved our operational efficiency.
You can run a million batch jobs or tasks at night when all of your highly skilled people are at home sleeping.
By implementing automation tools, you can minimize human errors and improve efficiency.
AWS provides the best support, followed by Microsoft, and then Google.
They provide better support for the enterprise edition.
They quickly evolve with changing technology trends, easily adopt new features, and incorporate them into the product.
The technical support is very polite, helpful, and available 24/7.
If something fails at 3 AM in the morning, you need to fix it and get it back up and working really quickly.
Camunda offers a high level of scalability, especially when using its SaaS model, which manages and scales implementations automatically.
ECS and Fargate make horizontal scalability very easy.
Our license doesn't limit our ability to configure Control-M as needed, allowing us to easily create new agents or environments.
It can absorb more workload wherever needed.
As the workload on Control-M increases, its scalability is much higher.
There haven't been any significant outages in my experience with Camunda.
The downtime is higher compared to AWS.
The testing and development phases need to be more rigorous before releasing patches.
Once properly implemented, the system becomes very stable, which is one of its strongest attributes.
More open documentation would be beneficial to understand the deployment process better and facilitate easier setup.
There is an issue where, in some situations, I need to scale up by observing both CPU and memory usage of containers, yet under the current options available at Amazon, this is not possible.
They could provide more documentation and tutorials to make the initial setup easier to understand.
We've experienced main problems with MFTE where having one setup means when an error occurs, the entire service goes down.
Documentation should be maintained for all versions since they provided the application.
AWS pricing is very competitive compared to Azure and cheap compared to Google.
There is a licensing cost for using the SaaS model and Enterprise edition of Camunda.
The licensing cost is very high, and they often consider switching to IBM Workload Scheduler or other options.
Control-M tends to be more expensive compared to other solutions, but users get great value from it.
Control-M is among the highest-priced solutions in the market.
EC2 makes scaling horizontally incredibly easy, especially when working under the ECS service.
The biggest difference between Camunda and Bonita might be that Camunda is simpler and more flexible for setting.
Automation is more advanced, deployment is fast, and version control has been simplified.
The user interface is comprehensive and lets me view all my jobs on one page, monitor everything, and access the job history.
It is easy to integrate Control-M with technologies for data ops or DevOps processes as things change, and it is not complex compared to other workload automation tools available in the market.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Camunda | 23.9% |
| Control-M | 4.7% |
| Other | 71.4% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 41 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 15 |
| Large Enterprise | 29 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 26 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 113 |
Camunda revolutionizes process orchestration by enabling seamless automation and integration with AI, human tasks, and existing systems while ensuring security and governance.
Built for collaboration between business and IT, Camunda empowers organizations to manage complexity, boost efficiency, and maintain competitive advantage. With a clientele of over 700 top organizations like Atlassian, ING, and Vodafone, Camunda is a trusted partner in designing, orchestrating, automating, and refining critical business processes to accelerate digital transformation. Its open-source nature, ease of use, and REST API integration make it a versatile choice for various needs.
What are Camunda's key features?In banking, Camunda automates processes and manages transactions, while in telecommunications, it optimizes service orders. Governmental and public sectors benefit from workflow automation. Organizations often use either the enterprise edition or the open-source version to create APIs and manage business rules effectively.
Control-M by BMC is engineered to manage hybrid cloud workflows, offering orchestration capabilities starting at $29,000 annually. Aimed at helping growing teams, it efficiently supports cross-environment scheduling and automation needs.
Control-M offers robust cross-platform scheduling, automation, and integration with applications such as SAP and Informatica. Users appreciate its ease of use with a graphical interface, centralized management, and monitoring capabilities. Advanced features, including Managed File Transfer, automated error handling, and real-time alerts, enhance productivity. The ability to unify workflows and support diverse environments makes Control-M a trusted tool in many sectors. While improvements in reporting flexibility and API integration with tools like ServiceNow are needed, addressing performance issues during upgrades could enhance its value. Offering improved support for new technologies and cloud environments is beneficial, with cost-effectiveness being a consideration.
What are the key features of Control-M?Control-M is leveraged in industries like finance for enterprise scheduling and data management, supporting mainframe, Linux, Unix, Windows, and cloud platforms. It contributes to workflow orchestration and workload automation, improving operational efficiency and enhancing IT infrastructure across those environments.
We monitor all Process 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.
