IBM Workload Scheduler VS Temporal
As of 5 November 2026, Temporal is named by 735 companies and IBM Workload Scheduler by 170; IBM Workload Scheduler skews to companies under 200 people (24% vs 55%), Temporal to companies over 1,000 (20% vs 52%).
As of 5 November 2026 · refreshed daily · counts move as websites, DNS and career sites are re-read.
The website-and-DNS footprint is not comparable between a marketing suite and a CRM: IBM Workload Scheduler's script and mail records show on hundreds of thousands of small sites, Temporal rarely leaves a trace outside its own apps. Compare on the job-posting numbers; use the footprint for reach.
- IBM Workload Scheduler: 2–200 employees
- 24%
- Temporal: 2–200 employees
- 55%
- IBM Workload Scheduler: 1,000+ employees
- 52%
- Temporal: 1,000+ employees
- 20%
- Postings per company, 90 days
- 4.3 · 2.3
- Website or DNS footprint
- 0 · 0
Who chooses which
Share of each tool's companies in every segment. "Leans" marks a gap of more than two points.
| Segment | IBM Workload Scheduler | share | Temporal | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Self-employed | 1 | 1% | 39 | 5% | Temporal |
| 2-10 employees | 5 | 3% | 147 | 20% | Temporal |
| 11-50 employees | 13 | 8% | 108 | 15% | Temporal |
| 51-200 employees | 23 | 14% | 151 | 21% | Temporal |
| 201-500 employees | 22 | 13% | 70 | 10% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| 501-1000 employees | 18 | 11% | 71 | 10% | even |
| 1001-5000 employees | 31 | 18% | 84 | 11% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| 5001-10000 employees | 18 | 11% | 26 | 4% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| 10,001+ employees | 39 | 23% | 39 | 5% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Segment | IBM Workload Scheduler | share | Temporal | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Manufacturing & industry | 43 | 25% | 22 | 3% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Business & finance services | 40 | 24% | 134 | 18% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Technology & software | 37 | 22% | 482 | 66% | Temporal |
| Utilities & infrastructure | 9 | 5% | 11 | 1% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Automotive | 8 | 5% | 6 | 1% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Commerce & trade | 8 | 5% | 22 | 3% | even |
| Public, community & associations | 6 | 4% | 14 | 2% | even |
| Media & content | 6 | 4% | 17 | 2% | even |
| Transport, logistics & rental | 4 | 2% | 6 | 1% | even |
| Consumer services & leisure | 3 | 2% | 6 | 1% | even |
| Property & construction | 3 | 2% | 5 | 1% | even |
| Health care | 2 | 1% | 7 | 1% | even |
| Segment | IBM Workload Scheduler | share | Temporal | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 76 | 45% | 544 | 74% | Temporal |
| France | 14 | 8% | 5 | 1% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| United Kingdom | 11 | 6% | 43 | 6% | even |
| Germany | 10 | 6% | 15 | 2% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Canada | 7 | 4% | 12 | 2% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Poland | 5 | 3% | 6 | 1% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Netherlands | 4 | 2% | 6 | 1% | even |
| Austria | 3 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Australia | 3 | 2% | 14 | 2% | even |
| Brazil | 3 | 2% | 4 | 1% | even |
| Italy | 3 | 2% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Sweden | 3 | 2% | 4 | 1% | even |
| India | – | – | 9 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Singapore | – | – | 5 | 1% | outside top 12 |
| Segment | IBM Workload Scheduler | share | Temporal | share | Leans |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IT operations & business systems | 158 | 15% | 61 | 3% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Software engineering | 99 | 9% | 1,346 | 61% | Temporal |
| Manufacturing and production | 80 | 8% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Engineering (non-software) | 65 | 6% | 39 | 2% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Product, program & project management | 52 | 5% | 44 | 2% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Quality, safety & environment | 42 | 4% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Skilled trades and field service | 42 | 4% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Data & AI | 39 | 4% | 405 | 18% | Temporal |
| General management & consulting | 31 | 3% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Sales | 29 | 3% | 27 | 1% | even |
| Finance & accounting | 27 | 3% | 1 | 0% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Logistics warehouse and transport | 27 | 3% | 3 | 0% | IBM Workload Scheduler |
| Customer service & success | 17 | 2% | 30 | 1% | even |
| Human resources | 14 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Education & training | 12 | 1% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Unclassified | 6 | 1% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Administration & office | 5 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Marketing & communications | 5 | 0% | 3 | 0% | even |
| Design & UX | 3 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Facilities cleaning and security | 3 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Procurement and purchasing | 3 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Real estate and property | 3 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Business development & strategy | 2 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Healthcare support and caregiving | 2 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Hospitality and food service | 2 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Legal, compliance & risk | 2 | 0% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Healthcare clinical | 1 | 0% | – | – | outside top 12 |
| Public safety and protective services | 1 | 0% | 1 | 0% | even |
| Research and science | 1 | 0% | 5 | 0% | even |
| Construction and civil | – | – | 1 | 0% | outside top 12 |
The companies behind each column
Companies using IBM Workload Scheduler →
Companies using Temporal →
workflow engines scheduling ranked →
Quote the sentence with the date and the link. The numbers change daily; the link always shows the current ones.
Temporal is named by 735 companies in job postings and IBM Workload Scheduler by 170; 0 name both. (Breaknorm, 5 November 2026, https://breaknorm.co/compare/ibm-workload-scheduler-vs-temporal)
Read from the source, not self-reported
Every number on this page can be traced to a page we crawled or a posting we read. Full methodology →
- Job postingsRead hourly from career sites. A tool counts when the employer's own text names it as the team's system; both tools can count for one company.
- Website and DNSScripts and embeds on the company's pages, plus SPF, DKIM, MX and CNAME records of its domain that point at the vendor.
- SegmentsCountry, size and industry from the company profile built from its website.
- Not a reviewNo ratings, prices or feature claims. For those, read the vendors.
IBM Workload Scheduler vs Temporal: questions
Which is more used, IBM Workload Scheduler or Temporal?
By companies naming it in their own job postings, Temporal (735) over IBM Workload Scheduler (170). By website-and-DNS footprint, Temporal (0 vs 0), because its scripts and mail records sit on many small company sites.
Who chooses IBM Workload Scheduler?
24% of IBM Workload Scheduler companies have 2 to 200 employees, against 55% for Temporal. 52% of IBM Workload Scheduler companies have over 1,000 employees, against 20% for Temporal.
Do companies run both?
0 companies name both in their postings, usually IBM Workload Scheduler in marketing and Temporal in sales, or during a migration.
Where do these numbers come from?
From the employer's own text in job postings read hourly from career sites, and from scripts found on company websites in our crawl. No vendor data, no surveys.
Get either list your way
The same data as a search, over MCP and the API, as bulk files, or pushed to you as it changes.
Every company on either tool,
with the person who owns it
Filter on IBM Workload Scheduler or Temporal. Start free, no card.