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

IBM OMEGAMON vs OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence 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

IBM OMEGAMON
Ranking in Mainframe Management
1st
Average Rating
5.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OPS/MVS Automation Intellig...
Ranking in Mainframe Management
7th
Average Rating
9.4
Reviews Sentiment
8.3
Number of Reviews
27
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (13th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Mainframe Management category, the mindshare of IBM OMEGAMON is 26.0%, down from 28.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence is 2.7%, down from 3.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Mainframe Management
 

Featured Reviews

PB
Good stability but it is lacking the ability to see historical information
We can only see online information but there isn't any historical data to see something that happened a few hours previous. We don't have the ability to access that information. Previously, with MainView, we could look back at information from two days before and get information. We could easily get information from Plexus. Now, we don't have a single screen to check which has been annoying. Compared to MainView, Tivoli is rubbish. We are forced to use this solution. We couldn't stay with MainView. I would like for it to be easier to check the system performance. It should have the ability to see historical data. We can't see the percentages to see the percentages of the CPU utilized. We should be able to see how much was used by our part of the system. Now, we have to continuously recalculate that information.
GP
It automates responses, preventing issues from becoming more severe
I just installed version 12.3, which actually already has a number of new features. It's going to make it easier for some of our new users. I'm old-school, I learned it the old way. I actually want to go back and implement it and start doing things the new way. As I need to train people, it's going to make it easier for them and make the learning curve much shorter. The new release addressed some shortcomings of the product. It was old-school. The learning curve was a little bit long in the beginning, but it's really come a long way.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's stable enough. I haven't noticed any problems since it was installed."
"It allows us to respond faster to issues. If there are issues that come out, we're able to capture a message and alert somebody about it."
"It's a very stable product. I very much like the SSM stuff in it. The rules engine, it's awesome."
"It alerts the operators when it is time to repair the communications and the IPLs."
"The documentation is simple, easy to follow, and use. A limited, first-time systems programmer can do it, in that it is out-of-the-box almost functional."
"The performance of it is beyond exceptional. It is probably one of the best products that I have ever worked with. It is easy to use, comprehensive, and can perform almost any task you need it to."
"I do not have to keep recordings. It is there and is proactive. It helps the operators, human editors, and me."
"I can and interrupt what's going on, bring a job down if I need to, and bring it back up."
"With the automation pieces we can bring this region up or take this region down, and it allows us to always meet our time critical requirements."
 

Cons

"We can't see the percentages to see the percentages of the CPU utilized. We should be able to see how much was used by our part of the system. Now, we have to continuously recalculate that information."
"Performing a stop/restart of OPS/MVS could be a little smoother. Without special coding, some undesired tasks will be started and some necessary tasks will be stopped if we have to bounce OPS/MVS during the day."
"Some of the command sequences are too long."
"One thing that comes to mind is the MQ interface. The last time we tried to use it, it seemed a little clunky."
"The further expansion of the mainframe teamcenter interface. Also, the web services support is something that I am looking into."
"It definitely needs more web-based interface, to be more mobile-open. More APIs, more open source to it."
"The GUI interface could be improved, but that is coming. They are working on that."
"Scalability is zero. It cannot be scaled because of its age."
"The reason sometimes it is not stable, we do not have the expertise to write the script.​"
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Mainframe Management solutions are best for your needs.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
17%
Government
11%
Healthcare Company
10%
Logistics Company
20%
Educational Organization
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Also Known As

IBM Candle, Tivoli
CA OPS MVS Event Management and Automation, CA OPS/MVS Event Management and Automation, Unicenter CA-OPS/MVS Event Management and Automation
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Sharp Corporation
Tieto
Find out what your peers are saying about OPS/MVS Automation Intelligence vs. SYSVIEW Performance Intelligence and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,295 professionals have used our research since 2012.