Listing Thumbnail

    Control-M SaaS Starter Pack

     Info
    Deployed on AWS
    Control-M SaaS is an application workflow orchestration platform that integrates, automates and orchestrates complex data and application workflows, leveraging AI capabilities across highly heterogeneous technology environments.
    4.3

    Overview

    Play video

    Fully Managed Enterprise AI Workflow Orchestration for AWS

    Run mission-critical application, AI, and data workflows without managing infrastructure. Faster delivery, consistent governance, and scalable automation, powered by AI.

    The solution integrates with Amazon Bedrock and leverages AWS GenAI services to create AI agents orchestrated by Control-M.

    Control-M SaaS delivers:

    • Fully managed enterprise AI orchestration, no infrastructure or upgrades to handle
    • Centralized control across application workflows, file transfers, and data pipelines that keep workflows running on time
    • Proven reliability, visibility, and governance for hybrid and multicloud environments
    • Natively integrates with AWS services (S3, Bedrock, Snowflake, etc.) and hundreds of other enterprise systems
    • Orchestrates AI agents in event-driven workflows
    • Modern AI assistant (Jett) and agentic AI capabilities to create workflows

    Start now by purchasing directly through AWS Marketplace.

    All the power of Control-M; delivered as SaaS.

    Learn more about Control-M  

    Highlights

    • Simplifies workflows across hybrid and multi-cloud environments
    • Deliver data-driven outcomes faster by managing production data pipeline workflows in a scalable way
    • In-depth workflow observability with intelligent predictive analytics and reports

    Details

    Delivery method

    Deployed on AWS
    New

    Introducing multi-product solutions

    You can now purchase comprehensive solutions tailored to use cases and industries.

    Multi-product solutions

    Features and programs

    Buyer guide

    Gain valuable insights from real users who purchased this product, powered by PeerSpot.
    Buyer guide

    Financing for AWS Marketplace purchases

    AWS Marketplace now accepts line of credit payments through the PNC Vendor Finance program. This program is available to select AWS customers in the US, excluding NV, NC, ND, TN, & VT.
    Financing for AWS Marketplace purchases

    Pricing

    Control-M SaaS Starter Pack

     Info
    Pricing is based on the duration and terms of your contract with the vendor. This entitles you to a specified quantity of use for the contract duration. If you choose not to renew or replace your contract before it ends, access to these entitlements will expire.
    Additional AWS infrastructure costs may apply. Use the AWS Pricing Calculator  to estimate your infrastructure costs.

    12-month contract (1)

     Info
    Dimension
    Description
    Cost/12 months
    Starter Pack (SaaS)
    Control-M SaaS Start with 500 Executions (Base package)
    $29,000.00

    Vendor refund policy

    BMC does not provide any refunds

    Custom pricing options

    Request a private offer to receive a custom quote.

    How can we make this page better?

    Tell us how we can improve this page, or report an issue with this product.
    Tell us how we can improve this page, or report an issue with this product.

    Legal

    Vendor terms and conditions

    Upon subscribing to this product, you must acknowledge and agree to the terms and conditions outlined in the vendor's End User License Agreement (EULA) .

    Content disclaimer

    Vendors are responsible for their product descriptions and other product content. AWS does not warrant that vendors' product descriptions or other product content are accurate, complete, reliable, current, or error-free.

    Usage information

     Info

    Delivery details

    Software as a Service (SaaS)

    SaaS delivers cloud-based software applications directly to customers over the internet. You can access these applications through a subscription model. You will pay recurring monthly usage fees through your AWS bill, while AWS handles deployment and infrastructure management, ensuring scalability, reliability, and seamless integration with other AWS services.

    Support

    Vendor support

    BMC provides documentation and general support at our BMC DOCs site. We also offer direct support plans and support from BMC Partners. For more information please visit 

    AWS infrastructure support

    AWS Support is a one-on-one, fast-response support channel that is staffed 24x7x365 with experienced and technical support engineers. The service helps customers of all sizes and technical abilities to successfully utilize the products and features provided by Amazon Web Services.

    Similar products

    Customer reviews

    Ratings and reviews

     Info
    4.3
    231 ratings
    5 star
    4 star
    3 star
    2 star
    1 star
    62%
    35%
    3%
    0%
    0%
    27 AWS reviews
    |
    204 external reviews
    External reviews are from G2  and PeerSpot .
    Anonymous

    Streamlined Batch Processing with Control-M

    Reviewed on Jun 03, 2026
    Review provided by G2
    What do you like best about the product?
    I like that Control-M helps me manage different workflows seamlessly with a single view. It also aids in faster troubleshooting and simplifies governance. The initial setup seems cool and isn't that difficult.
    What do you dislike about the product?
    .
    What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
    I use Control-M for complex batch processing and automating data pipelines. It solves operational complexity, scalability issues, and breaches. I appreciate its single view to manage workflows, allowing faster troubleshooting and simplified governance.
    Anonymous

    Efficient Scheduling with Room for Interface Improvements

    Reviewed on Jun 02, 2026
    Review provided by G2
    What do you like best about the product?
    I like the interface of Control-M. It's pretty fast, especially the desktop interface. I also like the planning features, like getting an estimate for when a job will be completed. That's very useful.
    What do you dislike about the product?
    I feel like loading a lot of jobs is not that great. There's a lot of delay when I go into the monitoring section. It first renders a default view, then takes time to take its own shape. I also don't like dragging a lot. I have to drag towards the map quite a bit, and if I see a connection between two different jobs that are far apart, I have to scroll all the way through. There's no easy way to click back.
    What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
    I use Control-M to schedule jobs between different hosts and orchestrate applications. It allows us to manage our microservices, automating job sequences by triggering component tasks in order.
    Ivan Martínez

    Batch monitoring has improved and supports reliable mainframe and Windows job control

    Reviewed on May 13, 2026
    Review provided by PeerSpot

    What is our primary use case?

    I have used Control-M  mostly for batch monitoring across three projects with financial institutions. The primary focus was on batch monitoring and checking the health of the environment in production or pre-production settings. In almost every project, we implemented jobs that check network connection from the mainframe and database health. I monitored and controlled many different processes with Control-M . I mostly used the Windows version, but I have also used the version that operates inside the IBM mainframe.

    I did not use Control-M for audit preparation. I knew that other people in my company used Control-M for audit purposes, but that was not my case.

    What is most valuable?

    In the mainframe part, Control-M works smoothly and perfectly with no lag or problems. However, in Windows, it certainly has some problems at times. I do not remember which version I was using, but it has a lot of lag when you try to click for rerun. You click it, the job starts working, but the display does not show the information that the job is already running. Sometimes it does not have the option for confirmation, so it was annoying to click run and not see the job working or doing anything because of the lag on the screen. Sometimes you click rerun or click the rerun button twice, so you get a second run that you did not want, but because of the lag, you get the second run. This was the most annoying thing in Control-M.

    Regarding what I would want improved, the tool in the mainframe would be very helpful with a report that you can follow directly in the path of the jobs. In the Windows version, you have all the graphics, so you can follow your path and see when it is going to run and how it is scheduled, which allows you to work more easily to change, hold, or make any movement in the job. In the mainframe version, it is complicated sometimes to follow the same path. You need to consult a lot of documentation for the planning of how the jobs are done, but you cannot find this information directly in Control-M in the mainframe.

    What needs improvement?

    I think the biggest thing I would like Control-M to improve in the mainframe is some way to track or follow the jobs a little bit more graphically, similar to the Windows version. I know it is very complicated, but that is my feeling.

    I would appreciate Control-M being more complex when it has more features, such as when you are making the planning for the batch. The more complex your tool is, the more you can do for certain parameters or to put a job exactly between two different processes. You can accomplish more with a more complex interface and tools. I think probably other job scheduling tools get a little bit easier or offer a more light version and a simplified version, but I think not. At least for me, when I was making the planning or checking the batch, the more complex and different tools for the different situations that you have in the batch is the better.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with Control-M for about five years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    There are a lot of stability issues, and it depends on the platform. In the mainframe part, Control-M works smoothly and perfectly with no lag or problems. However, in Windows, it certainly has some problems at times. I do not remember which version I was using, but it has a lot of lag when you try to click for rerun. You click it, the job starts working, but the display does not show the information that the job is already running. Sometimes it does not have the option for confirmation, so it was annoying to click run and not see the job working or doing anything because of the lag on the screen. Sometimes you click rerun or click the rerun button twice, so you get a second run that you did not want, but because of the lag, you get the second run. This was the most annoying thing in Control-M.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I do not have a certain response for how scalable Control-M is because every time I have needed to use it, it covers everything and I think that is great scalability. However, I have never been in a situation in which Control-M is insufficient and I need a more powerful tool for scaling or anything related to that. So, at least for my experience, it is great.

    How are customer service and support?

    In the two projects I have been working on, the maintenance was from BMC directly. I actually did not know that other people can give maintenance or support directly to the tool because I have always used it through BMC, which actually provides great support. It is very useful and they respond very quickly, so I never figured out that we would probably need local support.

    In the last project, we had a BMC group who was in charge of us or they responded directly to the last enterprise, in the last company where I was, so it was very helpful. If we had any problem regarding Control-M or BMC, they have a team in the company ready to support us.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I used another one, but I do not remember the name quite well. It was a bit more for DBA, but I do not remember. It was also a job scheduling tool, but I do not remember the name quite well. It was about six or seven years ago.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial deployment was pretty easy. Even the one in the mainframe was easy to follow. The one in Windows is super easy to start working with, and if you have minimum knowledge about COBOL and how the mainframe works, you will be very easily walked through the JCL. Also, the feature that you can see the JCL in the Windows version is fantastic.

    What about the implementation team?

    I am probably not the correct one because I have never done a quotation for the team to integrate the tool for the team or for any specific project, so I do not have information about this.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    As I said, I used another job scheduler in the past. I do not remember it quite well, but right now, it is very complicated to see another job scheduler that is not Control-M because I am very used to it. Also, since it is the principal tool in the mainframe for job scheduling, it is also complicated for me to try to figure out another tool for job scheduling because it has a lot of options. It is actually a pretty good tool for monitoring the jobs or for my experience and in the areas where I have been working. So, at this moment I cannot imagine another tool right now because Control-M is actually all that I need for my work.

    What other advice do I have?

    In the two projects I have been working on, the maintenance was from BMC directly. I actually did not know that other people can give maintenance or support directly to the tool because I have always used it through BMC, which actually provides great support. It is very useful and they respond very quickly, so I never figured out that we would probably need local support.

    For my last experience, I would give a rating of ten because we have this team specifically for us. However, in the past with another project when we had to call BMC directly for support, I think that overall I would give them an eight. I would give the support an eight overall.

    I give this review a rating of nine.

    Abhishek Singh

    Automation has transformed job scheduling and now saves significant time for multiple teams

    Reviewed on May 04, 2026
    Review from a verified AWS customer

    What is our primary use case?

    My main use case for Control-M  is serving as a Control-M  admin user where I manage Control-M, schedule jobs in it, and maintain the execution and troubleshooting of the jobs.

    A specific example of a job I schedule with Control-M includes scheduling SAP jobs, MFT  jobs, FT jobs, OS jobs, and Informatica jobs. I schedule many jobs on Control-M for different asset teams.

    I have automated many things that were running on Jenkins  to Control-M and deployed many automation parts for the scheduling team and admin team into the Control-M domain.

    What is most valuable?

    The best features that Control-M offers in my experience include a very easy scheduling component, a highly interactive GUI interface, and a variety of job types that I had never seen in different tools, including competitor tools of Control-M, such as AutoSys, TWS, Tivoli, or Dollar Universe. Control-M is a very easy tool, and it is easy to learn and easy to deploy.

    While the scheduling is easy and the GUI is interactive, I find that the setting of jobs and setting up a feature is very easy, and the deployment and promotion of jobs is very straightforward in Control-M.

    Control-M has positively impacted my organization by helping us automate many manual things specific to the development team.

    The main positive impact of Control-M includes time savings; we have automated many manual things that usually take six to seven hours, and now it is taking less than thirty minutes to one hour. We have reduced our time by almost fifty percent to eighty percent.

    What needs improvement?

    Control-M can be improved with a dashboard that should show the job execution time, output, and execution time, including start time and end time, for at least a year, so we could monitor everything on a single dashboard, similar to what can be created on Power BI, which could be integrated with Control-M.

    While the functionality of Control-M is very easy already, there is not much to do in the feature part, but the dashboard part showing the Control-M backend could be improved.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Control-M for ten years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    In my experience, Control-M is very stable.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Control-M's scalability has been good, as it has met my organization's needs as we have grown; the load balancer and load scheduling are very fine.

    How are customer service and support?

    The customer support for Control-M is very efficient and very fast.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Previously, we were using AutoSys, but we switched to Control-M because AutoSys is more difficult than Control-M, primarily because the GUI is very interactive in Control-M.

    What was our ROI?

    I have seen a return on investment from Control-M, which includes it being a money-saver and a time-saver.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Control-M has shown that compared to different scheduling tools, Control-M is definitely a cheaper option, and the licensing part is actually very convenient compared to other tools.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Before choosing Control-M, we evaluated other options including Dollar Universe, TWS Tivoli, and AutoSys, and then we decided to move to Control-M.

    What other advice do I have?

    Around one thousand users are using Control-M in my organization, with most of them coming from asset teams or different application teams, while around one hundred are from scheduling, operations, and administration.

    I require about ten to fifteen staff specifically for the deployment and maintenance of Control-M, and their roles include consultant, scheduler, or administrator.

    Control-M is currently used very extensively in my organization, and we do have plans to bring different asset teams onboard on Control-M, as we are helping them with ideas and features of Control-M.

    The biggest lesson I have learned from using Control-M is that automation is very easy, and we can deploy almost anything into Control-M.

    Integrating Control-M with technologies for my DataOps and DevOps processes has been easy, particularly with AWS  and different Linux platforms.

    It has not been a specific challenge to integrate Control-M with those different Linux platforms or other technologies, as Control-M already has a feature to integrate multiple types of jobs, making it easy.

    My advice to others looking into using Control-M is that I would definitely suggest it because its features are very good.

    I have given Control-M an overall rating of eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Private Cloud

    If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

    Himanshu Mohapatra

    Orchestration has streamlined enterprise workflows and consolidates complex job scheduling

    Reviewed on Apr 28, 2026
    Review from a verified AWS customer

    What is our primary use case?

    I primarily use Control-M  for scheduling jobs for scripts, batch scripts, and Linux scripts. Most of the writing involves service restarts on servers.

    For data ops and DevOps processes, the requirement involves integration processes that need to be scheduled in Control-M , allowing management of cyclic processes for integration and continuous execution.

    For building, scheduling, and managing production workflows, access is available through the URL or from the client software, Control-M Configuration Manager.

    Control-M has made it easier to create workflows for both cloud and on-premises environments with features such as drag and drop functionality. This makes it simpler for users to create jobs and integrate them with dependent jobs.

    Control-M has helped consolidate job scheduler tools with features such as SMS and mail capabilities, which other scheduler tools do not provide.

    What is most valuable?

    The best features of Control-M are particularly effective for Windows scripts and Windows servers, mainly for service restarts.

    What is most appreciated about Control-M is that it is easy and reliable. Jobs that have been created can be accessed through the front end URL, where operations such as hold, release, and execution can be managed entirely from the user GUI front end.

    Workflow orchestration is important for data ops and DevOps tasks as it makes scheduling scripts and managing various aspects of operations much easier through a single screen.

    What needs improvement?

    There are areas for improvement in Control-M as it carries some vulnerability points that could be fixed in any version, or it could be made easier for organizations to repeatedly install or update new patches with more stable versions.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using Control-M for four years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    On a scale from one to ten, with ten being the best, Control-M's stability is assessed as a solid product at approximately eight or nine. BMC support provides robust backing, with new patches arriving daily and being integrated with previous versions to replace outdated updates and fix bugs while unlocking more features. No stability issues have been noticed during the four years of use.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Regarding scalability, based on the features and how they help with day-to-day tasks, Control-M can be considered scalable.

    How are customer service and support?

    In terms of technical support, the focus involves creating scripts for service restarts on particular servers with the main target of providing support for automation services, automation management, job failure management, and managing the agent package and Control-M package.

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment of Control-M is easier than other tools. There are no critical tasks or activities required to deploy on the server; it simply involves setup and installation on the server with the tool ready to use immediately.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Regarding pricing, Control-M is not the cheaper option. License renewal is based on active jobs in a year, but it is cost effective. More features are provided compared to other tools at the same price.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    When comparing Control-M with other solutions such as ActiveBatch , JAMS , and IBM, Control-M offers easier manageable operations for hold, release, and execution, which can be managed directly from its front-end URL. In its configuration tools where jobs are created, there are no difficulties encountered. Unlike other tools where dependency tools and jobs must be mentioned separately, Control-M provides direct drag and drop functionality with arrows. This is much easier than other tools such as IBM Task Scheduler or Jenkins .

    What other advice do I have?

    Approximately 2,000 to 3,000 people use Control-M, including users from Axis Bank where all employees are using Control-M.

    Control-M is recommended to other users by providing them a demo and showing them the uses, which helps them understand the benefits and features that Control-M provides that cannot be obtained from other tools. This allows them to rely on Control-M for their day-to-day tasks.

    One point is deducted from the overall rating because Control-M carries some vulnerability points. The overall rating for Control-M is nine out of ten.

    View all reviews