We performed a comparison between Control-M and Redwood Software - Workload Automation Edition based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Control-M offers valuable features such as Managed File Transfer, credentials vault, integration capabilities, Role-Based Administration, file transfer integration, collaboration dashboard, scheduling, web interface, reporting, workload archiving, and forecasting. Redwood Software provides powerful job definitions, job importation, user authority restrictions, monitoring alerts, dashboards, error handling, task scheduling, system integration, user-friendly interface, real-time event monitoring, cloud automation, load balancing, memory management, and mobile notifications.
Control-M could benefit from improvements in microservices, API integration, reporting capabilities, and customization options. Redwood Software would benefit from improvements in reporting features, monitoring and alert service, user interface, and security standards.
Service and Support: Control-M's customer service and support have received both positive and negative feedback. Some customers appreciate the support team's promptness and expertise, while others believe there is room for improvement in terms of responsiveness and proactive assistance. Redwood Software's customer service and support have garnered predominantly positive reviews, with customers describing it as good and helpful.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Control-M was generally user-friendly and supported by informative guides and videos. Nevertheless, a few users encountered difficulties in converting jobs or dealing with database problems. Redwood Software was described as intricate and time-consuming. However, after completing the setup, it resulted in a smaller system footprint and facilitated easy upgrades.
Pricing: Control-M has a high setup cost, including expenses like infrastructure and salaries. This can be burdensome for smaller companies due to the pricing being based on the number of jobs or endpoints. Redwood Software has a more innovative pricing model that is based on job executions. This makes it cost-effective and advantageous for companies looking to explore new platforms.
ROI: The Control-M product offers advantages such as reduced expenses, enhanced task performance, stability, and efficient data handling. Users of Redwood have experienced time savings and improved job scheduling, resulting in a return on investment.
Comparison Results: The user reviews indicate that Control-M is the preferred product compared to Redwood. Users appreciate Control-M for its easy setup, consistent performance, useful features like Managed File Transfer and Role-Based Administration, and its ability to improve operational efficiency. Control-M stands out with its more extensive solution, greater automation, user-friendly interface, and the value it brings to organizations.
"The ability to dynamically predict batch run time is so valuable."
"In the client, it provides a unified view for me. I can alter the view that I want to see jobs and conditions. This is nice to have. The fact that you can see everything in one space is very important, especially these days where everything is about data and monitoring as well as because we are working from home on a global basis. So, I can monitor jobs in real-time, along with any failures or anything that might be stuck. The real-time monitoring and the ability to see everything in one place is important for us because we operate 24/7."
"It can do anything that I need. We do real-time jobs. We also do jobs that have to run at certain times. I have not been presented with a scheduling need that I was not able to do. It is very flexible and dynamic."
"I find Control-M for SAP and Control-M for Informatica good. You can connect to the Linux or Windows servers, and you can run multiple jobs."
"In Helix Control-M, we have the automation API that allows us to customize and do integrations easily in any script, such as Java or Python. It is all integrated within the integration API."
"We have a team called pro-mon and they monitor all the jobs for us. A single view for them makes it easy for them to monitor things."
"There is a batch monitoring tool called Batch Impact Manager, which proactively warns when processing is behind and SLAs are in jeopardy of being missed."
"BIM is a good tool to monitor SLAs, and being a financial organization, this is a very good feature for us."
"REL expressions are quite helpful for setting up the preconditions."
"Installing and configuring Redwood agents are easy, and scheduling jobs on Redwood helps in triggering the batches as per business requirements."
"The automated alert response is very useful for long-running and failed jobs during off-business hours."
"It's a very powerful tool. It has a lot of flexibility for how you can define jobs and build them. There are different ways in which you can construct jobs depending on your specific needs and requirements."
"It can centralize and support on-premises, hybrid, and cloud environments seamlessly."
"It conjures simplicity from the depths of complexity, effortlessly shouldering burdensome workloads."
"Its monitoring and alerting features are what I found the most valuable."
"There won't be a memory outage issue, as it uses its own server/ECC memory only."
"The performance could be better. Control-M Enterprise Manager tends to slow the system down even on a server with a six-core processor and 32 gigabytes RAM. The console is Java-based, so maybe OpenJDK 16 or 17 would be a performance improvement."
"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."
"In general, it is a very good product, and we are very happy with it. It meets all of our expectations."
"We would recommend modernizing the look and feel of Control-M. They also need to move towards more self-service and development in their environment. It's very antiquated."
"They really need to work on improving the web interface, as there are still a lot of bugs... In general, they need to do a lot of work on shoring up their testing and quality assurance. A lot of bugs seem to make it into the product."
"The community and the networking that goes on within that community need improvement. We want to be able to reach out to an SME, and say, "Hey, we are doing it this way. Does that make sense?" Ideally, they come back. and say, "Yes, it does make sense to do it that way. However, if you want to do it this way, then it is a little more efficient." We understand that one solution framework doesn't fit everybody. Depending on the breadth of the data and how broad it is, you may have different models for one over the other."
"Consider adding a mobile application for remote management."
"The biggest improvement they could have is better QA testing before releases come out the door."
"Customer support should be enhanced so that we can automatically raise tickets and incidents in customer service."
"We'd like to see an integration with ServiceNow to raise the tickets/incidents in ServiceNow."
"Enhancing the user interface would make it more appealing and accessible to a wide range of users."
"Redwood automation software could be made more user-friendly and intuitive, making chores and automation processes easier for users to complete."
"It lacks some of the common reporting features. I'm a bit surprised that there aren't some standard reports to be able to extract any data on usage. They've described to us that customers have different reporting needs, so they let them develop those, but reporting is a common need. It would be helpful to have it as part of the solution."
"Redwood Software has a high price tag, especially for small and medium-sized businesses that might not have the funds to engage in a complete automation system."
"The documentation for this product is limited, which can be improved in the future."
"We need the ability to pull data into an Excel format."
Control-M is ranked 1st in Workload Automation with 110 reviews while Redwood RunMyJobs is ranked 3rd in Workload Automation with 30 reviews. Control-M is rated 8.8, while Redwood RunMyJobs is rated 9.6. 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 Redwood RunMyJobs writes "Simple to use, increases CPU speed, and reduces the cost of machine time". Control-M is most compared with AutoSys Workload Automation, IBM Workload Automation, Rocket Zena, ESP Workload Automation Intelligence and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas Redwood RunMyJobs is most compared with Stonebranch, Tidal by Redwood, AutoSys Workload Automation, Automic Workload Automation and Automic Automation Intelligence. See our Control-M vs. Redwood RunMyJobs 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.
