Control-M vs Rocket Zena comparison

BMC and Rocket Software are both solutions in the Workload Automation category. BMC is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.6, while Rocket Software is ranked #22. BMC holds a 15.2% mindshare in WA, compared to Rocket Software’s 2.5% mindshare. Additionally, 98% of BMC users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Rocket Software users who would recommend it.

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 13, 2026

Control-M and Rocket Zena are competing in the workflow automation category. Data comparisons suggest Rocket Zena has an advantage due to its feature set, although Control-M offers better pricing and support.

Features: Control-M provides robust workload automation, job scheduling, and complex monitoring. It features cross-platform support, an intuitive GUI, and seamless integrations with SAP and Informatica. Rocket Zena stands out with flexible integration, a user-friendly web client, and the ability to automate complex workflows across multiple technology stacks.

Room for Improvement: Control-M can improve by enhancing its API integration and reducing complexity for new users. It would benefit from more visual monitoring tools and resolving GUI inconsistencies. Rocket Zena requires improvements in its customer support service and could enhance documentation for better ease of use. Refining deployment models and introducing a stronger community support framework could be beneficial.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Control-M is recognized for its simple deployment and superior customer service, allowing smooth integration into IT environments. Rocket Zena offers a versatile deployment approach but encounters efficiency challenges in customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Control-M provides a cost-effective, accessible setup with a strong ROI driven by effective performance management and support services. Rocket Zena, despite higher initial costs, promises long-term ROI through workflow optimization and feature value, making it a worthy investment for the future.

To learn more, read our detailed Control-M vs. Rocket Zena Report (Updated: January 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

January 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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 January 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of JAMS is 2.6%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Control-M is 15.2%, down from 25.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket Zena is 2.5%, down from 3.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Workload Automation Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Control-M	15.2%
JAMS	2.6%
Rocket Zena	2.5%
Other	79.7%

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

Raj Pattni

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.

Read full review

Akash Vishwakarma

RPA Developer at a consultancy with 51-200 employees

Scheduling tasks saves me a lot of time and they run in seconds, improving my productivity

Its FTP feature is very good, as is scheduling any process or task with the Zena client. I have found it to be very helpful. If a task fails, it gives you a prompt. Most of the time, I use it to create RPA tasks and schedule them. Whenever a task fails or is completed, I get a notification. It operates in layman's language. It's very easy and convenient for users who are very new to technology. The graphical user interface is very usable and most of the features and functions are displayed on the screen. You just have to click and see the options and you get to know what they are used for. There is a very good help option for whatever you need to know about the tool. With it, you will get to know about the product thoroughly: how to configure it and how to use it from start to end. The solution is very informative when using Zena Client and Zena workstation. There is very good communication between them. The results of tasks can be added as an attachment to an email. If I am not in front of my system, I can get a log and output where I can see if it was completed or, if there was an error, what the error is, and where it failed.

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

"The dashboard is intuitive."

"The most valuable feature of JAMS is its user-friendly interface, especially after upgrading from version six to seven."

"The most valuable feature is the easily accessible data in the database because we run a lot of SQL scripting against the database."

"The alerting in it is really targeted... you can set specific alerting so that if jobs in a given folder fail, certain people are alerted. You can also set security at the folder level, so that only people in those areas can go set them. That means that the alerting and security can be set at a very granular level."

"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."

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

"The planning capabilities are most valuable."

"I appreciate JAMS for its readily available templates that allow me to create and deliver stand-up presentations within minutes quickly."

More JAMS pros

"There is a batch monitoring tool called Batch Impact Manager, which proactively warns when processing is behind and SLAs are in jeopardy of being missed."

"The unified view where you can define, orchestrate, and monitor applications, workflows, and data pipelines is important because we have more than one team working on Control-M. We have a support team, a job-creation team, and a SAP team. We can all work together on it. It avoids anyone from working on his part and not using the latest modifications."

"The most valuable thing is that it works as advertised. We don't take advantage of some of the features like we should because that's not our primary role and responsibility in the environment that we manage. We only want to make sure that a file gets to where it was supposed to go, or we pull in a file and it comes to us correctly."

"After transitioning to Control-M, I have been very satisfied with it."

"BMC Control-M's Application Workflow Orchestration is very advanced."

"Control-M has improved application reliability and the SLAs in our company by quite a bit. You can see if problems are coming. If we have an SLA in a couple of hours, we know well before that couple hours if processing is behind, and it allows us to take some preventative action."

"The biggest return on investment for users of Control-M in the financial sector can be fairly straightforward: you can easily state how much performing tasks manually would cost in person-hours."

"Control-M is very easy to use; there shouldn't be any technical knowledge required for using Control-M, making it more user-friendly compared to other tools in the market."

More Control-M pros

"I like the whole product, but specifically, I like the license part. It's very easy to acquire a license for this product."

"From a Linux configuration point of view, Rocket Zena is straightforward. It's fairly easy to set up the server and agents once you know how to do it."

"I have found the scheduling feature the most valuable. I can map dependencies by using ASG-Zena. It gives a nice, quick visualization as to where things are."

"In the latest upgrade, Zena added a web-based client. The more I use it, the more I like it. It's an excellent interface. They do a good job of steadily improving the solution to make it more useful."

"Its FTP feature is very good, as is scheduling any process or task with the Zena client. I have found it to be very helpful. If a task fails, it gives you a prompt."

"The most valuable feature is the FTP file transfer."

"We haven't had any problems since we installed it. It runs as expected, we haven't had any critical problems. It helps keeps the business running 24/7."

"You can click Ctrl-G and bring a diagram view. You're able to view in a diagram format. The view that it provides is easy, and you can move to the left, up, or down. You can double-click on a certain process. It'll drill into that process and all of its underlying components. You can double-click on an arrow or a component, and it'll bring up a screen that'll have all the variables that are assigned to that particular piece, as well as the values at run time. So, the diagram feature of it, at least for me, is pretty valuable."

Cons

"The JAMS automation code isn't so clean."

"The only thing that they could improve on is the fact that they don't have a browser version of JAMS. They've got all the bits and pieces there if you want to build your own web version of it. It does come with a web client, but it's pretty clunky. They could improve on that."

"All my machines at work are Macs. JAMS client is a Windows-based thing. It is all built on .NET, which makes perfect sense. However, that means in order for me to access it, I need to connect to a VPN, then log onto one of our Azure VMs in order to access the JAMS client. This is fine, but if for some reason I am unable to do so, it would be nice to be able to have a web-based JAMS client that has all the exact same functionality in it. There are probably a whole bunch of disadvantages that you would get with that as well, but that is definitely something that would make life easier in a few cases."

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

"The error messages from JAMS often need clarification, hindering our ability to resolve issues swiftly."

"If around 5,000 or more jobs run at a time, JAMS slows down, and we have to wait around five to 10 minutes or restart JAMS scheduler services."

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

"I would like a simple web interface that I could give to my team to go in and kill jobs or see why jobs died so that we don't have to drill down deeper into the application and know everything about it. It would be good to have a really clean web engine that would say here are the jobs running. We can then click to see the time running and whether any of them fails and other similar things. I know they have one, but it's not very simplistic."

More JAMS cons

"BMC is already improving in artificial intelligence and integration with cloud. AI can improve and is definitely an area where BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer continues to enhance."

"Support is one aspect that they really need to improve."

"We have some plug-ins like BOBJ, and we need a little improvement there. Other than that, it has been pretty good. I haven't seen any issues."

"I believe Control-M can be improved as there is news about shutting down its GUI; I believe the GUI is more impactful than the web version, so continuing to use the GUI would be more useful."

"I'm not sure how the solution fits together with our business modernization initiatives, as there are things outside of my area, even though Control-M is the scheduling tool of the company. They may use other things, e.g., Big Data."

"It is a very strong product, but the reporting could be better."

"Some of the documentation could use some improvement, however, it gets you from point A to point B pretty quickly to get the solution in place."

"The licensing cost can be improved."

More Control-M cons

"The UI is not intuitive, and it would be nice if there was a web interface."

"Another one that is probably a little bit bigger for me is that when there is an issue or there's an error, it writes on a different screen. I have to find the actual process name and go to a different screen to view the alert that got generated. On that screen, everyone's processes, not just the processes of the folks in my department, are thrown. It takes me a while to find the actual error so that I could go in there and look at the alert. It could be because of the way it was set up, but at least for me, it isn't too intuitive."

"The documentation has room for improvement."

"Rocket Zena is a mainframe-based job scheduler. I would like it to be more open so that we can use it on a distributed platform."

"One area where it could be improved is communication between the different servers. Sometimes there are processes that have already been completed but we get a status notification that they're still active."

"In the web interface, it stacks the tasks across the top, and they accumulate until you close or clean those out. That seems a little cumbersome. You must right-click and close all tabs constantly to keep the console clean and manage your views."

"The scheduling mapping is a little disjointed. There is no wizard-type approach. There are a lot of different things that you have to do in completely different areas. They could probably add the functionality for creating all components of a mapping or an OPA schedule. The component creation could be done collectively rather than through individual components."

"In the next release, I would like the user experience to be improved. The user interface should be more appealing to gen-z."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing is pretty cheap because we have a state solution. So, we pay only $1,000 a year."

"All licensing models are a little overpriced, but JAMS offers a good value, especially given their support response times and ability to handle unforeseen issues like the SFTP transfers. I hope to find more use cases to get a better bang for our buck."

"The pricing of JAMS has not been an issue for us, as it has allowed us to save time."

"The pricing is very fair. We have seen very minimal to no price increases over the years. We are not banging down the door of support all the time either. I would imagine if we were a company that submitted a dozen support tickets a week for the last nine years, then it might be a little different because we would be eating up everybody's time. However, for what we get out of it, the pricing is extremely fair. Back when we were originally looking and brought in JAMS, we were looking at a couple of the other competitive products that were in this space, but the pricing from JAMS was far and away better than what the other competitors could offer for the same functionality."

"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."

"Definitely check how many single processes you want to run and count them as jobs. That is how you would work out your pricing on JAMS. For example, if you're running a number of commands and you can put them all into one script and run that script, you can count that as one job."

"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."

"The product is reasonably priced, and we don't have any add-ons."

More JAMS pricing and cost advice

"We have account based licensing. There are two or three types of licensing. One of them is based on the number of jobs, so we a license close to 4,000 jobs per day. The cost is based on the different modules, which we buy from them. If we a buy a hardware module, which we are presently using and integrating, that is an additional cost, but I'm not sure of the amount. Each module comes with a different cost."

"The solution is not cheap, it comes with quite a hefty price tag. Control-M is the market leader, but we still want the price to be as friendly as possible."

"It is an expensive solution."

"There are human costs in addition to the standard pricing and licensing of this solution."

"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."

"Apart from the standard license, if we avail any additional features, there's an extra cost. For example, Workload Archiving is an additional feature from the standard product, so we pay extra for that."

"BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer has reasonable pricing. What you pay for is the task or job, and as it's a module, it's complimentary, so you save about twenty percent of the job cost."

"we are more looking for a better cost/license/performance model because BMC, while we could say it's the best, is also the most expensive. That is what we are probably most annoyed with. We are paying something like €1,000,000 over three years for having 4,000 jobs running. That's expensive."

More Control-M pricing and cost advice

"The pricing and the licensing are good. It is affordable and can be used to improve and optimize productivity."

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

11%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

27%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Financial Services Firm

30%

Insurance Company

10%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	11
Midsize Enterprise	8
Large Enterprise	18

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	37
Midsize Enterprise	23
Large Enterprise	140

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Large Enterprise	6

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

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 b...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Redwood RunMyJobs vs JAMS

Compared 10% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs JAMS

Compared 9% of the time

Stonebranch vs JAMS

Compared 9% of the time

Automic Automation vs JAMS

Compared 7% of the time

Amazon Managed Workflows for Apache Airflow vs JAMS

Compared 4% of the time

More JAMS Competitors

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Control-M

Compared 13% of the time

Redwood RunMyJobs vs Control-M

Compared 8% of the time

Automic Automation vs Control-M

Compared 6% of the time

Stonebranch vs Control-M

Compared 5% of the time

ESP Workload Automation Intelligence vs Control-M

Compared 3% of the time

More Control-M Competitors

IBM Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 14% of the time

Rocket Zeke vs Rocket Zena

Compared 10% of the time

AutoSys Workload Automation vs Rocket Zena

Compared 8% of the time

ActiveBatch by Redwood vs Rocket Zena

Compared 7% of the time

Tidal by Redwood vs Rocket Zena

Compared 4% of the time

More Rocket Zena Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

JAMS

January 2026

Download JAMS product report

Buyer's Guide

Control-M

January 2026

Download Control-M product report

Buyer's Guide

Rocket Zena

January 2026

Download Rocket Zena product report

Also Known As

No data available

Control M, BMC Control-M Managed File Transfer, BMC Australia CTM

ASG-Zena

Interactive Demo

JAMS Software

BMC

Demo not available

Rocket Software

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

Control-M SaaS by BMC is tailored for growing teams, offering essential orchestration for managing hybrid cloud workflows starting at $29,000 annually.

Control-M integrates automation, orchestration, and a user-friendly interface to streamline workflows across banking, DevOps, and cloud environments. Key modules like Managed File Transfer and cross-platform support simplify job monitoring, while Batch Impact Manager enhances scheduling. Despite its capabilities, improvements in output analysis, reporting customization, offline access, and API integration are desired by users.

What are Control-M's key features?

Automation and Orchestration: Simplifies workflow management.
Integration: Connects with diverse applications seamlessly.
User Interface: Facilitates easy navigation.
Managed File Transfer: Streamlines secure file movements.
Self-Service: Empowers users to independently manage tasks.
Cross-Platform Support: Handles complex workflows efficiently.
Batch Impact Manager: Enhances scheduling and SLA management.
API Integration: Extends versatility across environments.

What benefits and ROI can users expect?

Increased Efficiency: Optimizes operations through automation.
Scalability: Supports enterprise growth and workload demands.
Improved SLA Management: Enhances reliability in scheduling.
Cost Savings: Streamlines processes to reduce operational costs.
Process Optimization: Ensures secure and efficient data exchanges.

Control-M is implemented in industries such as finance and enterprise operations, aiding in automating batch processing across platforms like SAP and Teradata. It integrates with secure file transfers, ERP systems, and databases, whether deployed on-premises or cloud, ensuring seamless operation optimization.

BMC

Rocket Zena offers scheduling and dependency mapping, intuitive interface, and containerized deployment. It simplifies workflow automation, enhancing efficiency across platforms.

Rocket Zena's strengths lie in its scheduling capabilities, graphical interface, and efficient deployment. It supports users in task management with cross-platform scheduling, streamlining repetitive tasks through automation. The web-based client facilitates process visualization and workflow management, while the notification system enhances task handling. Users can manage mainframe, Linux, and Windows environments while integrating with SAP and Oracle, ensuring comprehensive automation and efficient job execution.

What are the key features of Rocket Zena?

Scheduling and Dependency Mapping: Manages tasks efficiently with a graphical interface.
Containerized Deployment: Simplifies deployment and improves efficiency.
FTP Capabilities: Facilitates secure file transfers and backups.
Web-based Client and Whiteboard: Enhances process visualization and control.
Cross-Platform Scheduling: Automates repetitive tasks, reducing manual intervention.

What benefits and ROI should users expect?

Enhanced Efficiency: Automates complex tasks, freeing time for value-added work.
Improved Accuracy: Minimizes manual errors with reliable automation.
Streamlined Task Management: Simplifies workflow with intuitive notification systems.
Easy Integration: Supports SAP, Oracle, and other enterprise platforms.

In industries like finance and manufacturing, Rocket Zena plays a vital role in scheduling batch jobs and automating file transfers. It helps adapt task scheduling to business calendars and integrate with existing platforms, ensuring a smooth workflow that meets business objectives.

Rocket Software

Sample Customers

Teradata, Arconic, General Dynamics, Yum!, CVS Health, Comcast, Ghiradelli, & Boston’s Children’s Hospital

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

Fraternidad Muprespa

Buyer's Guide

Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

January 2026

Free Report: Control-M vs. Rocket Zena

Find out what your peers are saying about Control-M vs. Rocket Zena and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Control-M vs. Rocket Zena 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.