We performed a comparison between Automic Workload Automation and IBM Workload Automation based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Automic Workload Automation is highly praised for its strength, adaptability, and straightforward setup. It provides the capability to oversee various operating systems and products. IBM Workload Automation permits users to ask for added features and can initiate tasks across multiple nodes.
Automic Workload Automation can enhance its offerings in various aspects including pre-configured automation sets, multilingual support, features, user interface, web-based edition functionalities, file transfer management, pricing options, and customer assistance. IBM Workload Automation faces performance difficulties, navigation complexities, and requires enhancements in job dependencies, scheduling refreshes, simulation capabilities, system stability, reporting visibility, and API integration.
Service and Support: Automic Workload Automation is known for its satisfactory customer service, while IBM Workload Automation is highly regarded for its exceptional technical support. IBM's lab advocacy program offers in-depth code support, which sets it apart. Automic may encounter challenges in identifying the source of certain issues.
Ease of Deployment: Automic Workload Automation's initial setup duration varies based on the project size, requiring a team of one to three individuals. IBM Workload Automation's setup may pose challenges for individuals unfamiliar with IBM tools. Nevertheless, with guidance, the process becomes relatively easy.
Pricing: Automic Workload Automation has a higher setup cost as it is determined by the number of systems being orchestrated. IBM. Automic's pricing is considered to be one of the most expensive in the market.
ROI: Automic Workload Automation's value was not mentioned, however, it is often viewed as an extra cost. IBM Workload Automation strives to enhance efficiency, decrease expenses, and boost productivity, with ROI differing depending on specific objectives and use cases.
Comparison Results: Automic Workload Automation is the preferred option over IBM Workload Automation,. Automic stands out for its strength, scalability, simplicity of implementation, and wide range of features. It enables management of various operating systems and products, which is particularly beneficial for environments with a combination of outdated and modern technologies. Automic also provides predefined templates for specific tasks and allows different users to have access.
"The most valuable feature is the one for SAP batch processing... There are certain other mid-level workload automation tools which can handle the OS level, but SAP is something which is really very critical. Automic stands out from the ordinary tools because handling SAP processes is absolutely easy with it."
"I like the script engine of CA, where you can build everything you want."
"I use this automation solution, because it is very flexible. This automation solution supports a lot of computer platforms. Also, a lot of operating systems are supported other than automation solutions."
"I like that Automic Workload Automation has many features compared to other products. There are a lot of good features, and architecture-wise there is a valuable client concept. The architecture and the multi-tenancy is a multi-client concept. That is also useful."
"Being able to script, create something I want the software to do for a specific job. This allows me to do that. Very powerful."
"It is the automation. Saving time and money is the key. We automate everything."
"We have all of our payroll being done in the platform. There are a lot of different processes that need to be taken care of, and they all need to be linked together. When you put them into a workflow, and you know that you've built logic into that workflow, and you have alerting, it's something you can step back from. You don't have to be worried about every single piece of that puzzle. If something goes wrong, you have confidence that some alerting will let you know. It streamlines, it makes things go faster, less eyes on glass."
"The solution includes many features and is scalable and stable."
"The whole product is valuable because it is a tool for batch automation."
"The technical support is great, the product is easy-to-use, and it is stable."
"Provides a robust, full spectrum enterprise-wide WLA platform."
"I have supported this product in literally 100s of different environments and its unmatched in its ability to scale to any size."
"The DWC, when configured correctly, is a great GUI tool to provide Self-Service Scheduling capabilities to the user community."
"Jobs can be triggered in multiple nodes."
"The initial setup is easy."
"This solution has a request feature where users can request the added features they need to have developed. Based on client voting for those features, these are developed and released."
"We would like a way to test our cloud-based automations on-premises, and then migrate them to the cloud after they have been tested, without needing an additional license."
"From my point of view, the current product needs more stability."
"There is one missing part in the product concerning recurring tasks. You can schedule a recurring task by a context action, and run it as recurrent, but it creates a time container which can be quit and disappears."
"I would like to see more types of Calendars in the next release of this solution."
"The new user interface needs improvement. The previous version was good and stable. Now, we have to check the new one before using a web browser. It is not stable."
"Automic Workload Automation could improve the SaaS deployment."
"The vendor support is really bad and should be improved."
"Some of the usual features, like calendar details, are now not there."
"The performance of the previous versions could be better."
"Slow down on the releases a bit. I fully understand that IWA functionality is increasing at an amazing rate, but trying to keep up with the upgrades is rough."
"Scalability-wise, it can be a little bit challenging."
"The configuration of IBM Workload Automation has some challenges. We have a difficult time customizing it, but it is similar to other solutions."
"This solution does have bugs and could be improved in this regard. However, these bugs are resolved relatively quickly."
"There should be more custom documentation, specifically around Java APIs. There should also be more training. In terms of features, we are currently using only 50% of its features. We don't use all features that are available, but there is always room for improvement in all of the tools."
"It is missing some features and can improve in areas where the competition is somewhat better like linking job dependencies."
"It would be helpful to have a mobile app that could be used to follow the job schedule."
Automic Workload Automation is ranked 7th in Workload Automation with 85 reviews while IBM Workload Automation is ranked 14th in Workload Automation with 28 reviews. Automic Workload Automation is rated 8.2, while IBM Workload Automation is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Automic Workload Automation writes "A tool requiring an easy setup phase that provides its users with flexibility and flow chart visibility ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM Workload Automation writes "With an easy setup phase in place, agent-based installation can be done in minutes". Automic Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Dollar Universe Workload Automation and OpCon, whereas IBM Workload Automation is most compared with Control-M, AutoSys Workload Automation, HCL Workload Automation, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and CA 7 Workload Automation Intelligence. See our Automic Workload Automation vs. IBM Workload Automation 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.
