No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Endevor vs Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Endevor
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
46
Ranking in other categories
Mainframe Application Development (3rd)
Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (forme...
Ranking in Software Configuration Management
6th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of Endevor is 12.4%, down from 32.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) is 9.1%, up from 8.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Configuration Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Endevor12.4%
Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product)9.1%
Other78.5%
Software Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

RobertMartin3 - PeerSpot reviewer
Production Supervisor Technical at Ontario Power Generation
Asset dashboards have created slow, rigid workflows and have limited effective life cycle tracking
The single dashboards do not help my team or the company as a whole. I feel the dashboards are not helpful because the search features are not customizable. The software is web-based and the server is extremely slow. To improve Endevor, its cloud or web-based server capabilities should be increased so that the software is faster. The ability to customize reports should be increased.
reviewer1527093 - PeerSpot reviewer
Development Team Lead at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Very flexible with Johnny-on-the-spot tech support
I would like to see them enable parallel development for online. It's available now for batch stuff on the mainframe. Jenkins, IBM, and Rocket all supposedly already have safe and workable version of Git for the mainframe. With that in mind, we need to know where our feature is. Unfortunately, as good as ChangeMan is, if we're listing downfalls, they should be talking to me about this. Not me having to go talk to them about it. Hopefully, they have this in the works and they are positioning their product for the future. That's just a straightforward comment. It really comes down to whether they are complacent or not. The other thing that should improve is cost. Git, even on the mainframe, a large part of the components "free". They're the way you set them up yourselves and they're self-sustaining and built into the infrastructure. You can't charge me for that. I gave ChangeMan an overall score of eight, but what could drive them to a nine is coming up with a way for all my code that belongs together to be tracked and moved together. Everything should move based upon the mainframe; it needs to be alerted and synchronized.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is extremely stable software."
"​It was an easy install. Since it was all set up, it pretty much runs itself now."
"We can make it do pretty much whatever we want, depending on just how complicated we want it to be, as it is pretty flexible."
"It makes production changes much easier to implement, and to recover if there are problems."
"We have been able to replicate entire SDLCs for new clients and have them loaded and ready to use Endevor in as little as one week. This was possible with the use of Endevor variables within the processors, so that a single processor was able to function for multiple systems across the entire SDLC."
"It provides secure, controlled access to source management."
"The integrity of the system is valuable, providing secure, controlled access to source management and the typical check-in and check-out functions in a typical source management product."
"The developers can very easily see what has changed on a particular piece of source code or a program, and others can look at that as well so they can coordinate their changes. It makes it much easier to promote a piece of code up to production."
"We audit once a year for our ChangeMan access, accurate financial programs, and all of that. Auditors really love ChangeMan for how easy it is to get through and how tight the security is on it. Our internal auditors, external auditors, and SOX editors love this solution. We're in the healthcare business, so HIPAA regulations and all such things are a big deal, and this makes all that really simple."
"Scalability is great. It has absolutely met every need for us so far. We do have some concurrent development paths and we're able to flexibly assign variables. At the same time, our skeletons assemble where we want them to, so the scalability is very good."
"What’s most valuable to me is the ability to compile the code and move it through the test and productions environments."
"Auditors really love ChangeMan for how easy it is to get through and how tight the security is on it."
 

Cons

"There are a lot of areas: using it cross-platform; across a diverse set of application portfolios, including legacy systems, as well as open systems; both waterfall and Agile development."
"Needs more audit capability when it comes to changes to settings that are made by administrators, as many of these are done through the panels and are therefore not logged as an action against a configuration item."
"If they deploy it correctly, then it provides a tremendous benefit, but if you lay it out wrong, it can be a nightmare to work with."
"There are a lot of screens in it. The process for moving out my other solutions, it could be more convenient. There are a lot of steps to go through and a lot of screens to go through to get it accomplished."
"I would rate it a solid eight out of 10, because it is stable, it serves the need that we have now. However, I don't know if it's serving where we are going with the Agile."
"It's not a perfect solution."
"Sometimes finding errors and output can be difficult because it spits out so many messages that it is hard to figure out which ones are the ones you need to look at and what flow did it actually take through the processor is what they call them."
"I like the stability and CA’s responsiveness, but I haven’t used anything else, so it’s hard to judge."
"I would like to see a better search tool."
"As such, there's nothing wrong with the product. It is great, but there are small things that can be better to make it much more friendly. The way you navigate through fields can be improved. If I'm going to stage a component over something that exists and that I've created in another library, and I want to pull it in and write it over what I've got there in my package, I've got to type in that data set name every time. That can be aggravating. It is not a big deal. The way things are sorted can also be improved. If you're doing a delete of a bunch of components, you can't sort those out by type or anything. Some things are just standard, and you can't look at them in a way that would be helpful."
"Their technical support is not so good. To be perfectly honest, that's one of the reasons we were looking at other solutions."
"I would like to see them enable parallel development for online. It's available now for batch stuff on the mainframe. Jenkins, IBM, and Rocket all supposedly already have safe and workable version of Git for the mainframe. With that in mind, we need to know where our feature is."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is fairly simple, you don't need multiple licenses."
"The product is expensive."
"Just make sure if you are going to license, ensure you license the right features.​"
"The solution is very expensive."
"It's worth the value. The pricing is fairly good, justifiable for the return on investment."
"It's competitively priced and, as far as I know, it's just an enterprise license. We have found it is worth the money."
"It's on a yearly basis. I am not aware of any additional costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Configuration Management solutions are best for your needs.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Insurance Company
9%
Construction Company
8%
Performing Arts
5%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Insurance Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise40
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Endevor?
The single dashboards do not help my team or the company as a whole. I feel the dashboards are not helpful because the search features are not customizable. The software is web-based and the server...
What is your primary use case for Endevor?
My main use case for Endevor is asset management. For asset management, we use Engage software for life cycle management, eHealth, and eStrategy.
What advice do you have for others considering Endevor?
My advice to others looking into using Endevor is that if you are a nuclear electrical utility, the software is likely well-suited, but if you are any other utility, the software is poorly suited f...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

CA Endevor Software Change Manager, Endevor Software Change Manager, CA Software Change Manager for Mainframe, CA Endevor SCM
Open Text, Micro Focus ChangeMan ZMF
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Blue Hill Data Services Inc.
SPTS Technologies, Generali France, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (BBH), Kutxa-Vital-Banco Madrid, Space and Naval Warfare Information Technology Center (SPAWAR ITC)
Find out what your peers are saying about Endevor vs. Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,834 professionals have used our research since 2012.