We performed a comparison between Control-M and SnapLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Process Automation solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Technical support is very helpful and available 24/7."
"Its compatibility with the new technologies and platforms, like the Google Cloud or Amazon, is the most valuable. Its console allows us to view the duration and execution of a process. It is also very easy to use and easy to implement."
"The File Transfer component is quite valuable. The integration with products such as Informatica and SAP are very valuable to us as well. Rather than having to build our own interface into those products, we can use the ones that come out of the box. The integration with databases is valuable as well. We use database jobs quite a bit."
"It is simple to create, integrate, and automate data pipelines and to ingest data from different platforms. It integrates well between platforms."
"The most valuable features are the managing of file transfers and the product keeping up with technology."
"The integration with ServiceNow is good. When a job ends and there are problems with it, we automatically open an incident in this platform, and the number of the incident is forwarded to Control-M. This means that we have a record of it with the log of the job."
"We can tie together all the workloads across the estate and make the whole process reactive to events."
"The most valuable feature is the reporting function. It allows us to pull up reports for specific information that the end-users are looking for."
"SnapLogic is more user-friendly than Boomi in terms of debugging. You can move the mouse to a place, and it will record and show the data easily."
"It is a stable solution."
"The initial setup is very straightforward."
"By using snaps instead of functions in code, you can see the building blocks of the integration visually. This helps a lot."
"The solution could improve its API management."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The connection with SOAP is the best feature."
"They are very good at building out new aspects according to customer requirements."
"There's a lot of room for improvement and I think it can be more user-friendly."
"Its architecture is old. AutoSys gives more flexibility."
"After we complete FTP jobs, those FTP jobs will be cleared from the Control-M schedule after the noon refresh. So, I struggle to find out where those jobs are saved. Then, we need to request execution of the FTP jobs again. If there could be an option to show the logs, which have been previously completed, that would help us. I can find all other job logs from the server side, but FTP job logs. Maybe I am missing the feature, or if it is not there, it could be added."
"Some of the documentation could use some improvement, however, it gets you from point A to point B pretty quickly to get the solution in place."
"The MFT applications should have more functionality and flexibility within that tool. Having more flexibility with that tool for handling the one to many or many to one concept. Like being able to take data from one source and push it to many locations or pull data from many locations and bring it back into a single source. That's why we still use our TPS program for the file transfers just because we don't have some of those capabilities available to us within MFT."
"Integration with some applications and platforms is complex and requires development. We have done some integration with the application integrator, but it was more like a manual solution. This is an area that can be improved."
"I would like to see more auditing capabilities. Right now, it has the basics and I've been trying to set those up to work with what our auditors are looking for."
"Everybody's biggest gripe is the reporting capability option. It is a gripe because there is a lot of information in Control-M, but the solution doesn't have a good reporting tool to extract that information. Now, if you want all that information, you need to rely on another third-party BI tool to extract the information out of Control-M."
"SnapLogic doesn't provide any on-premises software, so users have only cloud-based software to use."
"The solution isn't ideal for complex processing or logic. We use another solution for that."
"SnapLogic should have some inbuilt protocol mechanism in order to speed up."
"There is room for improvement with APM management and how task execution looks."
"The support is the most important improvement they could make."
"We'd like zero downtime in the future."
"It needs some more snaps. I would like to see some of the features be changed in some of the snaps."
"What could be improved in SnapLogic is that it was not capable in terms of processing a large number of datasets, but at that point, SnapLogic was evolving. It didn't give a lot of Snaps. I heard recently there are a lot of Snaps getting added and the solution was being enhanced, particularly to connect different data sources. When I was working with SnapLogic six months to one year back, I faced the issue of it not being capable of handling a huge volume of datasets or didn't have much of Snaps, and that was the drawback. If there is any large number of data sets, that's based on or depends on your configuration. If it is a huge volume of data, other traditional ETL tools such as Informatica and Talend can process millions and billions of records, while in SnapLogic, the Snaplex fails or it returns an error in terms of processing that huge volume of data. Informatica, Talend, or any other ETL tool can run for hours in terms of jobs, while SnapLogic jobs fail when the threshold is reached. SnapLogic isn't able to withstand processing, but I don't know if that's still an issue at present, because the solution is getting enhanced and it's been more than six months to one year since I last worked with SnapLogic. There are now a lot of Snaps getting added to the solution, and if it can overcome the limitations I mentioned, SnapLogic could be the go-to tool because currently, it's not being used as much in organizations. It's being used comparatively less compared to other retail tools."
Control-M is ranked 4th in Process Automation with 110 reviews while SnapLogic is ranked 10th in Process Automation with 21 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while SnapLogic is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Control-M writes "We have seen quicker file transfers with more visibility and stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SnapLogic writes "Easy to set up, easy to use, and is low-code". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Automic Workload Automation, whereas SnapLogic is most compared with AWS Glue, IBM InfoSphere DataStage, Azure Data Factory, Informatica Cloud Data Integration and SSIS. See our Control-M vs. SnapLogic report.
See our list of best Process Automation vendors.
We monitor all Process 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.
