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

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
1st
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
8.0
Number of Reviews
45
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 July 2025, in the Software Configuration Management category, the mindshare of Endevor is 33.1%, up from 33.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Rocket ChangeMan ZMF (formerly a Micro Focus product) is 8.6%, up from 6.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Configuration Management
 

Featured Reviews

Efrén Yanez - PeerSpot reviewer
Good analysis and integrations with helpful automation
If I had to comment on an area of ​​improvement or something new in the next or future version, I would like to see AI-assisted coding and impact analysis for mainframes. It is actually a fairly complete product. It is robust with a solid history and is always growing in functionality. It has a high level of maturity, which benefits the users and the administrators. This tool, with its group of options, facilitates the integration with other business processes, which allows you to take advantage of other solutions by incorporating automatic functions.
reviewer1527093 - PeerSpot reviewer
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

"​Stability has been really good. I have actually never had to open an issue or report an issue since I have been running it.​"
"It puts all our source in one product. We know where to go to gather all our source code and which source is associated with which executable. It's a one-stop-shop, one place to go for everything."
"The most valuable feature of Endevor is the software controller."
"Any question that an auditor has about our processes and approvals is all stored in Endevor."
"The flexibility, because I know a lot of the competition pigeonholes you into definitions and character limitations, and Endevor is wide open."
"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."
"Having something that is out-of-the-box that you can customize to suit your organization's needs is huge."
"It standardizes the processing of all the development. Everything gets produced in a constant and consistent manner."
"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."
 

Cons

"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."
"Interfacing with some change control products that are not CA's, it's a little glitchy on the approvals of changes. It requires special needs for the users for approvals."
"Learning the tool for the first time was extremely difficult, and it could be because of all the other processes we had around it. But knowing you can do these things in batch, you can do things in the foreground or online mode, and then these, you have to have a package for. There are these rules, and some of the concepts inside the tool are not clear, like what is the CCID? Why do I have to have one? What is that? And how is it used? As a developer, it's not important to me - I don't know what a CCID is, and I don't care - but apparently it's important to someone."
"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."
"I would like to have better integration with other products."
"The initial setup can be less complex and has room for improvement."
"There should be better integration between CA Endevor Software Change Manager and Zowe."
"One feature of Endevor is its Backout feature. If there is a problem, it can back out the executables. The only problem with that is that it will not back out the source in Endevor. For example, you can do a back out and it will back out the executable to the previous version, but it doesn't back out the source version in Endevor. It would make it much better if when you did a back out of Endevor, it would back out both the source and the executable and keep them in sync."
"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."
"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

"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."
"The product is expensive."
"Licensing is fairly simple, you don't need multiple licenses."
"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.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
35%
Insurance Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
10%
Insurance Company
9%
Real Estate/Law Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Endevor?
The product’s implementation process is complicated and restrictive. It is difficult to find file programs and use a different tool for the setup as the compilation process is all locked up, at lea...
What is your primary use case for Endevor?
We use the product as a source manager and program manager. It helps in controlling the mainframe code and performing data migrations.
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: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.