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

Flux vs JAMS comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 21, 2025

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

Flux
Ranking in Workload Automation
32nd
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Managed File Transfer (MFT) (28th)
JAMS
Ranking in Workload Automation
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Workload Automation category, the mindshare of Flux is 0.7%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JAMS is 2.6%, up from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Workload Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
JAMS2.6%
Flux0.7%
Other96.7%
Workload Automation
 

Featured Reviews

it_user4080 - PeerSpot reviewer
Developer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Lightweight and extensible with great support staff
* Lightweight * Uses java standards * Can run in j2se or j2ee environments * Can run as embedded or standalone * Works with multiple db or in-memory * Great support staff * Extensible * Cluster(able) * Can integrate and be a major player in any SOA environmentFlux has made excellent design choices the benefits of which can be passed down to customers in terms of price and capability. I don't see any IT vendor rival this.
reviewer2770605 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Workload Automation solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Healthcare Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise18
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about JAMS?
I find the historical tracking feature of JAMS invaluable for reviewing past events.
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 functionality and importance of the tool, although the increase did unsettle our management.
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 functioning properly. From the past three years, it has remained the same, but sometim...
 

Comparisons

 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MetLife DHL Express The Clearing House Payments Company ADP Bank of New York Mellon Conway, Inc Carnegie Mellon University
Teradata, Arconic, General Dynamics, Yum!, CVS Health, Comcast, Ghiradelli, & Boston’s Children’s Hospital
Find out what your peers are saying about Flux vs. JAMS and other solutions. Updated: January 2026.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.