Sold by
Control-M SaaS (Australia)
Control-M SaaS is a SaaS application workflow orchestration platform that integrates, automates and orchestrates complex data and application workflows across highly heterogeneous technology environments
Reviews (269)
Computer Software
Reliable and Efficient Job Scheduling & Workflow Automation
Reviewed on Aug 17, 2026
Review provided by G2
What do you like best about the product?
What I like best about Control-M is its ability to simplify and automate complex job scheduling and workflow management. It provides a centralized platform to schedule, monitor, and manage jobs across different applications and environments. I particularly appreciate its dependency management, as it helps ensure that jobs run in the correct sequence and reduces the chances of manual errors.
The monitoring and alerting capabilities are also very useful because they provide clear visibility into job execution and quickly highlight failures or delays. This makes troubleshooting more efficient and helps maintain reliable business operations.
Another advantage is its integration with various platforms, databases, and applications, which makes it flexible for enterprise environments. Overall, Control-M improves operational efficiency, reduces manual intervention, and provides better control over critical workflows. Its reliability, automation capabilities, and centralized monitoring make it a valuable tool for managing enterprise workloads and ensuring smooth, consistent job execution.
The monitoring and alerting capabilities are also very useful because they provide clear visibility into job execution and quickly highlight failures or delays. This makes troubleshooting more efficient and helps maintain reliable business operations.
Another advantage is its integration with various platforms, databases, and applications, which makes it flexible for enterprise environments. Overall, Control-M improves operational efficiency, reduces manual intervention, and provides better control over critical workflows. Its reliability, automation capabilities, and centralized monitoring make it a valuable tool for managing enterprise workloads and ensuring smooth, consistent job execution.
What do you dislike about the product?
One thing I dislike about Control-M is that it can be complex for beginners, especially when working with advanced scheduling, dependencies, and workflow configurations. It takes some time to understand all the features and become comfortable with the interface. Troubleshooting failed jobs can also sometimes require checking multiple logs and dependencies, which can be time-consuming. In addition, managing a large number of jobs and workflows can become challenging if they are not properly organized and documented. Some administrative tasks may also require additional knowledge and permissions, which can slow down the resolution process. However, these challenges are manageable with proper training, documentation, and experience. Overall, while Control-M has a learning curve and can sometimes feel complex, its powerful automation and monitoring capabilities make it a useful tool for enterprise workload management.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M helps solve several challenges related to job scheduling, workflow automation, monitoring, and dependency management. It reduces the need for manual job execution by automating repetitive tasks and ensuring that jobs run at the right time and in the correct sequence. It also helps manage dependencies between different applications and processes, reducing failures caused by incorrect execution order.
The centralized monitoring and alerting features make it easier to identify failed or delayed jobs and take corrective action quickly. This improves visibility into the overall workflow and reduces troubleshooting time. Control-M also helps maintain consistency and reliability across business-critical processes.
For me, the main benefit is improved efficiency and reduced manual effort. It allows me to monitor workflows from a central platform, respond to issues faster, and ensure that scheduled jobs are completed successfully. Overall, Control-M helps improve operational reliability, saves time, and makes workload management more organized and efficient.
The centralized monitoring and alerting features make it easier to identify failed or delayed jobs and take corrective action quickly. This improves visibility into the overall workflow and reduces troubleshooting time. Control-M also helps maintain consistency and reliability across business-critical processes.
For me, the main benefit is improved efficiency and reduced manual effort. It allows me to monitor workflows from a central platform, respond to issues faster, and ensure that scheduled jobs are completed successfully. Overall, Control-M helps improve operational reliability, saves time, and makes workload management more organized and efficient.
Dave Campbell
Job scheduling has simplified cross-platform workflows and supports complex dependencies
Reviewed on Aug 06, 2026
Review provided by PeerSpot
What is our primary use case?
My use cases for Control-M involve it being a job scheduler that can accomplish many things for our organization. It includes a large number of dependencies and many different types of jobs. We run jobs on Windows and Linux, and we have ARO pods, so it is a significant part of our environment.
What is most valuable?
What I appreciate most about Control-M is that once you become familiar with it, it is very easy to use. When jobs run, the application displays pretty colors so you can quickly determine whether a job is successful, running, or unsuccessful. It is very easy to follow what is happening on the screen. The ease of use is what I value most about the product.
What needs improvement?
What I dislike about Control-M is that sometimes things can become very complicated with certain job setups. I am not certain if that is really Control-M's fault, but setting up complicated dependencies with difficult scheduling and the Control-M New Day time can become very complicated, especially with the New Day feature.
Regarding scalability, I do have a concern with it. When we change OS versions and want to do an upgrade, that is the one time I have an issue with the product. Control-M does not allow us to build a new server to scale up our environment to a different OS or anything of that nature. We have to build the new server, migrate our configuration over with the same application version, and then upgrade. This is a major issue for me, and there should be an option to build a new server and upgrade by simply putting the new version on it.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been working with Control-M since approximately 2002, which makes it 24 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
From a stability perspective, I have been using Control-M for 24 years, and we have only experienced one major issue with it during that entire time. I would give it a 10 out of 10 for stability. The server never crashes because of Control-M, and we never have any CPU or memory issues since the product is very stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Regarding scalability, I do have a concern with it. I have never needed to scale it out much due to not having a large environment. However, when we change OS versions and want to do an upgrade, that is the one time I have an issue with the product. Control-M does not allow us to build a new server to scale up our environment to a different OS or anything of that nature. We have to build the new server, migrate our configuration over with the same application version, and then upgrade. This is a major issue for me, and there should be an option to build a new server and upgrade by simply putting the new version on it.
How are customer service and support?
Anytime I have needed help from BMC, they are very responsive. I have been working with Control-M for almost 25 years, so I do not follow up with them frequently, and I do not use their services often. However, anytime I have had questions, they are right on the ball. Their support for the product is very good.
I do not have to wait very long for them to answer me, and they usually provide a resolution very quickly. I handle several products, and in comparison to all of them, the quality and speed of Control-M's support seem to be the best. They always reply back as soon as I open a case, usually the same day within hours, regardless of the case's priority. They work on it quickly, getting me an answer within two or three days at most. There is very rarely a time I go longer than a couple of days without a response. Their support is among the best available.
How was the initial setup?
I find that the actual installation of Control-M is fairly straightforward. There are two components, so I can basically install each separately. It is not overly complicated to install. The setup can become complicated depending on how much I have to configure. Basically, my company tries to leave it out of the box for most of the configuration, so we do not do much customization after it has been installed, as Control-M does a very good job of setting proper default standards for us.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Control-M is on the expensive side because I know we have looked into other pricing for other products in the past, and it is on the expensive side of things.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
The only alternate solutions I really use for comparison are Windows Task Scheduler or Cron. Those are just the basic default schedulers that come with the operating system.
What other advice do I have?
We definitely use DevOps and DataOps with Control-M. The DataOps we have integrated basically uses scripting methods to accomplish this. We do not use many of the available plugins. On the DevOps side, we have ARO pods, so we set up a pod environment, which was somewhat tricky at first because we were one of the first to start using this type of setup. Now it is much better. I have checked the documentation they have now, and it is significantly better than it used to be. In the beginning, it was quite complicated, as they pointed you to GitHub and said to look there for all the details. Now they have much better documentation, making it much easier for us.
I believe my relationship with BMC is transformative. They always keep us up-to-date on things. They have seminars and user groups, which is another significant benefit. I attend a Toronto user group basically once a year, and we get all kinds of valuable information from that. I believe it is a good relationship in that regard.
Overall, I give Control-M a rating of nine out of ten for everything, including the price.
Shivam T.
Control-M Simplifies Batch Scheduling and Boosts Operational Efficiency
Reviewed on Aug 03, 2026
Review provided by G2
What do you like best about the product?
What I like most about Control-M is how it simplifies batch job scheduling and monitoring by providing a centralized view of all workflows. The interface is straightforward for day-to-day operations, and features like job history logs are helpful when tracking what ran and when. scheduling calendars make troubles shooting much easier. overall control m has imporvedoperational efficiency, reduced manual effort and our batch processing more reliable
What do you dislike about the product?
One downside of Control-M is that the initial setup and configuration can be complex, especially for new users. Other than that, the interface is clean and functional for monitoring jobs and workflows, although some screens feel dated. Once you become familiar with it, navigating between job logs and schedules is straightforward.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M helps us automate and manage complex batch workflows that would otherwise require significant manual effort. It ensures jobs run in the correct sequence, handles dependencies between applications, and provides real-time monitoring and alerts if something fails.
Financial Services
Powerful Automation with Seamless Legacy Integration
Reviewed on Jul 27, 2026
Review provided by G2
What do you like best about the product?
Great features and connectivity. It will integrate with any platform you can thinking including old legacy platforms. It’s very powerful and simple to set up complex automation
What do you dislike about the product?
Steep learning curve – It isn’t especially intuitive for new users. Getting comfortable with job definitions, conditions, dependencies, calendars, and resources takes time.
Complex setup – The initial installation and configuration, along with integrating it with different systems, can be time-consuming and typically requires experienced administrators.
Expensive licensing – It’s geared toward large enterprises, so licensing can be a significant cost, particularly compared with newer workflow orchestration tools.
Complex setup – The initial installation and configuration, along with integrating it with different systems, can be time-consuming and typically requires experienced administrators.
Expensive licensing – It’s geared toward large enterprises, so licensing can be a significant cost, particularly compared with newer workflow orchestration tools.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M addresses the challenge of managing and automating complex business processes. Rather than relying on people to manually start jobs, move files, or keep an eye on overnight processing, Control-M schedules, runs, and monitors these tasks automatically. It helps ensure jobs run in the right order, retries failures when appropriate, alerts support teams if something goes wrong, and provides clear visibility into the entire workflow.
Information Technology and Services
Control-M Streamlines Automation with Strong CI/CD and API Integration
Reviewed on Jul 24, 2026
Review provided by G2
What do you like best about the product?
I like that Control-M integrates well with CI/CD pipelines and APIs, making it easier to automate application deployments and batch processes while improving visibility and reliability.
What do you dislike about the product?
Control-M is a very capable enterprise workload automation tool, but it can be expensive and has a learning curve. Managing large environments often requires experienced administrators, and organizations can become dependent on the platform over time.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
For enterprises with complex scheduling needs, Control-M provides a centralized platform to manage thousands of jobs running across different technologies, such as databases, Java applications, ERP systems, cloud services, and file transfers. Instead of relying on separate schedulers or manual processes, teams can define job dependencies, schedules, and recovery actions in one place.
Stefan Iani
Workflow orchestration has become deeply integrated with DevOps and simplified job deployment
Reviewed on Jul 22, 2026
Review from a verified AWS customer
What is our primary use case?
My use case for Control-M is that I am a Control-M administrator, and I use it for everything, starting from installing, upgrading, and configuring it, to defining jobs and file transfers, so almost everything.
What is most valuable?
The best feature of Control-M is that it has a lot of integrations with different other tools; I don't think there is any other workflow orchestrator that has so many integrations. I think it has the most, and if you don't have one, you have the possibility to create the integration with whatever tool you want. That's one of the best things I've seen in Control-M.
The ease of integrating Control-M for my DataOps and DevOps processes is actually great because it has native integration with Jenkins and CI/CD pipelines, so you don't have to work hard to integrate this. In my current company, we have Control-M integrated with Jenkins, and everything gets deployed via Jenkins without accessing Control-M, which is honestly the best way to do it.
Building, scheduling, and managing production workflows with Control-M is easy. Control-M also has a feature called Jobs as Code, so if a developer wants to create a job, they don't need to have extensive Control-M knowledge. Developers can create Control-M jobs and flows via code by scripting them in JSON files, making it not so difficult.
What needs improvement?
In terms of improvement areas for Control-M, the only concern I've seen is some mismatch in documentation, which is not ideal. You may easily find things that happen on the application, but you can spend time or have to raise a case to BMC to find out what went wrong, which is something they need to improve.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Control-M since 2005, so it should be 21 years.
How are customer service and support?
My relationship with BMC is transformative rather than transactional.
BMC serves as a strategic partner and trusted advisor, helping my company map migrations and deployment. They also developed an integration module specifically for our company based on our requirements.
The integration process with Redwood was easy, didn't take long, and wasn't too complex, as there weren't many jobs involved.
I rate the technical support of Control-M as a nine.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I have migrated from Redwood some time ago.
How was the initial setup?
In my opinion, the deployment process is easy; it is not difficult to deploy Control-M.
The deployment of Control-M takes hours.
What about the implementation team?
Maintaining the Control-M system is easy.
What was our ROI?
I honestly have no idea about precise return on investment percentages, but I think the Jobs as Code aspect and the integration with Jenkins reduce the time of deploying things and training people to use the application to create jobs.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Regarding pricing, I consider Control-M to be the most expensive scheduling tool. However, it's worth it, as you buy something powerful and complete. In my opinion, despite being expensive, it is one of the best orchestrator tools available.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
When comparing Control-M with other solutions such as Broadcom or ActiveBatch, I find that Control-M has a huge integration capability with many tools that other competitors do not have, particularly the native integration with Jenkins and CI/CD pipelines, which other tools lack.
What other advice do I have?
The easy integration of Control-M with DevOps tools has made the decision to keep Control-M as the main scheduler in my organization a straightforward one.
Control-M is deployed in a hybrid model in my organization.
Control-M is deployed on AWS.
My organization is an enterprise business using Control-M.
I would recommend Control-M to other users and suggest they take it. They can conduct a proof of concept, but I don't think they'll find anything more complex than this tool, which is expensive but has everything you need. I rate this product a ten overall.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
Hybrid Cloud
If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?
Amazon Web Services (AWS)
MallikarjunaKotthari
Automation has eliminated manual night batches and now delivers cross-platform reports quickly
Reviewed on Jul 22, 2026
Review provided by PeerSpot
What is our primary use case?
Control-M's primary use case for our organization is scheduling jobs. We have daily manual work that previously required regular manual intervention, but by setting up Control-M jobs, we have eliminated this need and now run setup jobs on a daily basis that saves significant time.
Our team uses Control-M for scheduling jobs based on any requirement given by the business, and when we encounter repetitive tasks, such as extraction of reports from our database, we set up a job accordingly that extracts the required details and delivers them to our business people.
We have a daily batch with upstream and downstream feeds, and we have configured Control-M jobs including File Watcher jobs, pre-processing jobs, and loading jobs. Once loading is completed, we send reports to our downstream using Control-M jobs.
What is most valuable?
Control-M offers many features that benefit our operations. File Watcher jobs are particularly useful when we are supposed to receive a file that is not received on time, and we can configure alerts to reach out to the upstream people regarding delays.
Control-M also allows for quick delivery of reports across platforms. The cross-platform delivery feature stands out for our team because we are using a CD connectivity setup with Control-M to send reports from our Linux system to the mainframe system.
Control-M has features for holding a job when it fails due to a feed delay from upstream, and we can keep the job on hold until we receive the feed and then rerun it. We also have features for ordering jobs based on our configured calendar system for weekdays and weekends.
Control-M has positively impacted our organization by automating thousands of jobs, eliminating the need for manual intervention, which reduces the chance of human error.
By using Control-M, we save significant time. For example, it takes only two hours to trigger one hundred jobs compared to a full day without it, resulting in a reduction of thousands of errors in a month.
What needs improvement?
Control-M can be improved by enhancing the user interface, as some other batch schedulers are more user-friendly.
An additional improvement could be the inclusion of daily usage options on the homepage to facilitate regular work.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been using Control-M for eight years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
Control-M is stable.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
Control-M is scalable, allowing it to cover one team to another. If we set it up for one team, it may take an hour, and for another team, it may take an additional hour.
How are customer service and support?
Customer support for Control-M is very good, with quick responses and effective redressal mechanisms in place.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
We previously used AutoSys but switched to Control-M because it is the best in the market, and the transition was smooth.
What was our ROI?
We have seen a return on investment, as using Control-M saves us seventy to eighty percent of the costs that would otherwise require one thousand dollars.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I have two to three years of experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing related to Control-M.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
Before choosing Control-M, we evaluated manual processes and other batch job schedulers, and ultimately chose Control-M for its better results.
What other advice do I have?
Control-M is important for building, scheduling, managing, and monitoring production workflows, making it crucial for our Data Ops and Dev Ops initiatives, as it facilitates the delivery of requirements.
We depend entirely on Control-M as our production starts at midnight and completes within two to three hours, which is crucial for our business.
Many users in my organization use Control-M in various roles, including Consultant Specialist, Senior Consultant Specialist, Lead Consultant Specialist, Senior Software Engineer, Software Engineer, Project Manager, and Senior Project Manager.
Integrating Control-M with technologies for our Data Ops and Dev Ops processes can be challenging, but it plays a crucial role in transitioning to a cloud infrastructure and transferring files from one source to a destination.
The governance and security of Control-M entirely depend on how you configure your Control-M jobs, but I can say it is fully controlled and under compliance.
The reliability and output of Control-M are good, with no deviation expected from how it delivers outputs moving forward.
I advise others looking into using Control-M that it provides the best deliverables compared to other tools available in the market. I have rated this product nine out of ten.
Dewang P.
Reliable Enterprise Workload Automation Platform
Reviewed on Jul 22, 2026
Review provided by G2
What do you like best about the product?
Control-M provides a centralized platform for managing and automating complex workflows across multiple applications, operating systems, and business processes. Its scheduling capabilities are robust and flexible, making it easier to orchestrate workloads while maintaining visibility and control. The monitoring and alerting features help teams quickly identify and resolve issues before they impact business operations. I also appreciate the ability to manage dependencies, streamline batch processing, and improve operational efficiency through automation. The platform is highly scalable and well suited for enterprise environments that require reliability and governance.
What do you dislike about the product?
While Control-M is a powerful solution, the initial setup and configuration can be complex, especially for organizations with diverse environments and legacy integrations. New users may experience a learning curve when working with advanced scheduling and workflow capabilities. Some administrative tasks could be more intuitive, and there are areas of the user interface that could benefit from modernization and simplification. Licensing and implementation costs may also be a consideration for smaller organizations compared to their automation requirements.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M helps automate and orchestrate critical business workflows that would otherwise require significant manual effort and monitoring. It improves reliability by ensuring jobs execute in the correct sequence and provides visibility into workflow status across different systems and applications. This has helped reduce operational overhead, minimize scheduling errors, improve compliance, and accelerate issue resolution. By automating repetitive processes and providing centralized workflow management, teams can focus more on strategic initiatives rather than routine operational tasks, resulting in increased efficiency and better service delivery.
Giridhar P.
Universal Automation Powerhouse with Room for Troubleshooting Improvements
Reviewed on Jul 21, 2026
Review provided by G2
What do you like best about the product?
I love that Control-M helps me automate any type of job, whether it's on Informatica, Unix shell scripts, or even Python scripts. I'm fully relying on one tool that offers these universal features, automating the daily run workloads seamlessly. The flexibility and unique ability of Control-M to handle various jobs make it valuable, especially as it's globally accepted across my organization. The graphical user interface is seamless, providing an easy way to set up automation tasks, which is a great feature.
What do you dislike about the product?
Sometimes, I feel that, in spite of the job setup and the job location and the server specifics being correct, Control-M has trouble understanding these specifics, and the troubleshooting process takes a little bit long time. So maybe, some advanced documentation on how to make this troubleshooting easier could be the best aspect that could be improved. Also, the initial setup was a bit challenging; we had to employ some consultants from IBM and had mentoring for the team. Once we got a grip on the tool, it was smoother, but that initial phase was tough.
What problems is the product solving and how is that benefiting you?
Control-M automates my daily ETL batch jobs with a flexible interface. It supports various scripts like Informatica, Unix shell, and Python, allowing me to rely on one tool for automation. Its seamless graphical user interface simplifies setting up automation.
reviewer2873529
Automation has simplified complex scheduling and now runs high-volume daily workflows reliably
Reviewed on Jul 17, 2026
Review provided by PeerSpot
What is our primary use case?
Like any other batch scheduler, Control-M is what we're really using for the various workflows that we have to either do on a daily or hourly or whatever basis. We run them all through there.
What is most valuable?
I've worked with other ones, and I think the certain simplicity to how Control-M lets you set up a schedule or workflow is excellent. It's very easy to build everything together.
What needs improvement?
Most of my complaints have ever been with support for Control-M, not with the product itself. I can't really think of anything that I strongly dislike about the product.
Sometimes my gripes with the support relate to them being a little slow to get back on either a query or a problem issue. That's my biggest gripe on the support side. There are some people in the support area that are fantastic, and then there are others that feel like I'm being pushed off to the side. I don't know what's going on in the back shop, so I can't say for certain.
I'm currently fighting with support on one issue right now with Control-M, but it's not the overall product, it's just one sub-piece that's being problematic. It's the SAP interface with Control-M.
For how long have I used the solution?
My usage has definitely been more than ten years. I go back to release three or something.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
I've never really seen much of a problem with scalability for Control-M. I'm sure there is an upper limit to how many agents and how many jobs you could run, but I haven't hit that yet. Where I am right now, we load probably about three thousand jobs a day, but we run a lot more than that because you can load a job and run it hundreds of times.
How are customer service and support?
I'm going to give Control-M's support an eight on the scale from one to ten, with ten being the highest. That rating is mostly because of the reasons I've already mentioned.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I've used plenty of alternatives for Control-M in the past. Though some of them don't exist anymore or they probably still do. One of my former employers was a big CA-7 shop on the mainframe side, and on the distributed side, I used the IBM tool Workload Scheduler.
How was the initial setup?
The setup for Control-M is not horrible. Once you get the server built out correctly initially, it installs relatively easily. There are some things in the update format that I don't favor. They used to have an update and migrate model, which would allow you to move from one system to a new system if you needed to upgrade your operating system or switch to a different platform. Going from Windows to Linux, or from SUSE Linux to RHEL Linux was easy to do. That migrate model was very good, but they went to an upgrade in place model. You can't do it that easily anymore because what you have to do is upgrade in place where you are and then build a new box and then move the data over, which is a bit of a pain. It was one-stop shopping previously. They stopped that at version 9.18.
The implementation is handled by me and maybe one other person who are specifically doing the deployment and maintenance of Control-M.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I don't really have any thoughts about the pricing for Control-M. I don't deal with that, or I haven't in a very long time. I know one of the pricing models is based on workload, specifically how many tasks you load in a day. I don't know if there are any other pricing models other than that. That's the only one I'm familiar with.
What other advice do I have?
Control-M does require some maintenance on your end, as with any software. There are fix packs released or patches, and you need to be aware of that. BMC is very good about notifying you when they post out new patches or fix packs. It usually requires a downtime, but it's a very short downtime. It takes longer to take the product down than to apply the patch for Control-M. You have all the processes to shut down, apply the patch, and bring them all back up, and the up and down takes longer than the actual patch application sometimes. I would rate this review a nine out of ten.