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

Control-M vs IBM Workload Automation comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 9, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Control-M enhances efficiency and reduces costs by automating operations, increasing productivity, and supporting large enterprise centralization.
Sentiment score
5.2
IBM Workload Automation is valuable for complex setups with trained teams, despite maintenance costs and slower performance on simpler networks.
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.
It has reduced the total cost of ownership by 30% to 40%.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.4
Control-M's support is praised for responsiveness and expertise, though complex cases need better communication and troubleshooting efficiency.
Sentiment score
8.3
Opinions on IBM Workload Automation's support vary; some praise it, while others face delays and inconsistent service.
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.
The immediate acknowledgment and solutions provided by BMC's support team make it stand out compared to other tools.
I would rate their support between eight and nine out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Control-M is praised for scalability and robust functionality, though cost may be a concern for some enterprises.
Sentiment score
7.0
IBM Workload Automation is preferred for scalability in complex scheduling, with minor challenges at higher scales, especially in time zones.
It can absorb more workload wherever needed.
As the workload on Control-M increases, its scalability is much higher.
I would rate it a nine out of ten for scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Control-M is highly reliable with minimal glitches, praised for prompt support, regular updates, and high user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
8.8
IBM Workload Automation is viewed as reliable and stable, with minor issues resolved swiftly, boosting user confidence.
The downtime is higher compared to AWS.
The testing and development phases need to be more rigorous before releasing patches.
The stability of the Helix Control-M solution is good.
 

Room For Improvement

Control-M needs upgrades in analysis, reporting, interface, cost, monitoring, scalability, and integration for better usability and competitiveness.
IBM Workload Automation requires interface improvements, enhanced automation, better support, and lower maintenance costs to improve user experience.
They could provide more documentation and tutorials to make the initial setup easier to understand.
There should be an automation system for developers to set it up more easily and quickly.
What they've done about scheduling, other people are still trying to figure out.
The maintenance charges have increased significantly, and a lower cost would be beneficial.
 

Setup Cost

Control-M is costly but valued by enterprises for robust features, especially in banking and healthcare, with complex licensing.
IBM Workload Automation is costly but offers flexible pricing models with cloud advantages and justifies expense with reliability and features.
The licensing cost is very high, and they often consider switching to IBM Workload Scheduler or other options.
Pricing is generally affordable, though some features cost a bit more.
The best cell phone will always be more expensive.
 

Valuable Features

Control-M enhances enterprise operations with automation, seamless integration, cross-platform support, and advanced features for reliable, scalable workload management.
IBM Workload Automation excels with dynamic scheduling, multiplatform integration, user-friendly GUI, real-time updates, and effective monitoring.
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.
Control-M provides workflow orchestration, including scheduling, deploying, managing, and monitoring workflows.
One valuable feature of IBM Workload Automation is the ability to combine different applications and platforms to organize jobs together, creating dependencies.
 

Categories and Ranking

Control-M
Ranking in Workload Automation
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
122
Ranking in other categories
Process Automation (2nd), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (4th)
IBM Workload Automation
Ranking in Workload Automation
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
33
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Control-M is 21.8%, down from 26.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Workload Automation is 6.9%, down from 8.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Pedro Fuentes - PeerSpot reviewer
Cost-effective, excellent support, and centralized access and control
They have a department that handles requests for enhancements. I talked to Control-M guys back in October or November when they had a gathering here in Atlanta. We talked about not being able to go back in history in Helix Control-M for more than two weeks. We submitted a request for enhancement. They told us that they are working on it, and they are thinking of expanding that to 30 days. We would like to see it expand to 90 days, but they are working on it. In Control-M, we were able to go back 180 days, but that was on-prem. The storage of that data was on our own servers. We know that storage is money, and we do not expect them to store that much of the data, but at least 30 to 60 days seem proper.
Ilhami Arikan - PeerSpot reviewer
With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes
Sometimes we have issues with the solution's stability. So, stability can be improved. Reporting and visibility of the solution need improvement. These days, we need more visibility. We need to access the logs and databases easily. You need to keep track of the running number of logs, like which ones are executed, completed, etc. So if there would be a good reporting dashboard, then it would be good. There's room for improvement in the solution since it is a challenging thing when we want to use the solution's technology with our new technologies. For example, if we need to use TWS on our OpenShift platform, the solution's API is not capable enough. So the product itself needs to be aligned with new technologies.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
33%
Computer Software Company
10%
Retailer
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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?
It depends. It's packaged in such a way that you can buy the base model without all of the fancy stuff. You can try and keep your price similar to competitors. I guess it's natural throughout the w...
What needs improvement with IBM Workload Automation?
IBM needs to move away from its native terminology and adopt a more cloud-centric approach. For example, IBM still refers to machines as 'workstations,' whereas other systems, like Control-M, use m...
 

Also Known As

Control M
IBM Tivoli Workload Scheduler, IBM TWS
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CARFAX, Tampa General Hospital, Navistar, Amadeus, Raymond James, Railinc
Standard Life Group, Banca Popolare di Milano, A*STAR, ArcelorMittal Gent
Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. IBM Workload Automation and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,491 professionals have used our research since 2012.