Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Box vs IBM FileNet comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Box
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
40
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Storage (12th), Digital Asset Management (3rd), Document Management Software (2nd), Content Collaboration Platforms (5th)
IBM FileNet
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
100
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Box is 3.9%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.4%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

Shrikant Pillay - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows you to upload and download files quickly but lacks integration with Office 365
For enterprise users, the data is in a local repository. We use it for files for the end user process. This is a cloud solution. In my current organization, we have over 10,000 people using this solution. I use it very extensively. Users these days are working remotely You can upload your bin,…
Emad Rizki - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates seamless integration for large enterprises with strong deployment capabilities
FileNet was scalable and could be implemented into big multinational organizations. However, it has become very expensive recently. Compared to low-code solutions such as Appian and outsystems, FileNet has gaps, mainly because it requires coding, which is not preferred by clients due to pricing concerns in Pakistan. We transitioned clients to cloud solutions, although FileNet has been strongly integrated with on-prem deployments.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Box is extremely stable, they have not been hacked or lost any data in the past seventeen years. I am very impressed with it."
"I like that Box makes it easy to deploy virtual machines."
"The application is very light in terms of uploading and downloading files."
"We can provide controlled access to documents using the product."
"Box is very user-friendly; more so than SharePoint."
"It is a very user-friendly product."
"File sharing with collaborators not on the same domain with offline access from multiple devices: I work on many projects that are multi-organizational, such as with customers, suppliers, or acquisitions."
"Office Integration. The full integration into the Microsoft Office products is just perfect."
"We use IBM Datacap's capabilities to capture data and then we use FileNet's capabilities for filing, to create an archive of documents... We [also] use FileNet's ability to expose information via APIs and interoperate with other systems."
"The most critical benefit has been ease of use. It speeds along our development helping us go to market a lot sooner."
"It also helps with compliance and governance issues because it's a datastore that is not modifiable, and you can guarantee that. You cannot guarantee that with a folder-based file structure, where multiple people have access."
"It has given us a whole new environment to do document management and document storage."
"FileNet is very user-friendly... We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them."
"It is used by large enterprises. It has to be scalable and robust for them to use. We have seen that on multiple projects over the years."
"​It is very stable and reliable."
"The most valuable feature for me is the possibility to share and to collaborate, the possibility to connect FileNet with many other IBM products as well. It helps avoid the possibility of creating "island applications." We have an ecosystem where everything can be interconnected."
 

Cons

"The price must be lowered."
"Working on documents in real-time is sometimes faulty and could be improved."
"It could be cheaper."
"Improvements in speed - Box's high level of security impacts performance, especially when compared with other similar services."
"If you want to delete something in Box, you have to do it manually, one by one. That was my recent experience. They might have a bulk delete, but I could not find that option. If you want to delete something, you have to go to each and every file and delete it."
"One thing that Box would benefit from is a records management component."
"Maturity of the enterprise security around user management."
"They could integrate better with other platforms."
"I would like to have easier steps for setting up the application. They should have an easy one step process for the whole installation. Right now, you have to know the application well to set it up and have IT expertise."
"During the initial setup, all the details and different technical things that we were trying to figure out became complex."
"We do have some individuals that do need to come up to speed on it technically, and the only onsite training for Case Manager is in Europe, there is not a lot of US-based training. So they have to do all their training online rather than being able to go and have a good bootcamp-style training somewhere nearby."
"We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working."
"The basic and fundamental point about FileNet is that the interface is very bad. It's just not appealing so people are reluctant to use it."
"The setup process is very complex."
"The new user interface is not easy to set up, so some improvements along these lines would be good."
"What I would like to see is more integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I believe Box is cheaper than SharePoint."
"The more you dig, the deeper the level of tools, and the more expensive it becomes."
"Box's pricing is excellent."
"We are using the free version of the solution. There is a free version and monthly and yearly subscriptions available."
"The pricing may seem steep at first, but delve into the features and you'll soon realize it is incredible value for what you get."
"I'm in Higher Ed, so we purchase through Internet2-Net+. I absolutely recommend going that route for Higher Ed customers."
"Box needs to improve with their pricing in terms of licensing costs."
"A business account has a minimum of three users. If you are more than three people in-house, go for the Enterprise version. All the external users are free of charge."
"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."
"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."
"The licensing cost of FileNet is comparable."
"The biggest issue is the cost of the FileNet, because the license cost is very high. If a customer doesn't have good technical guides that are aware of the license calculation, they will pay too much. FileNet's license calculation depends on the processor and number of users. So my advice to a new customer is to be very careful with your calculations before purchasing FileNet."
"My customers have seen ROI. There have been productivity gains, time savings gains, and things that they have been doing much more efficiently in a more modern way than they were before."
"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."
"The physical space that we have gained back pays for the service. Therefore, it has reduced our operating costs overall. We have definitely seen ROI. I would estimate $30,000 a year."
"The platform is inexpensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
838,640 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
62%
Computer Software Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
4%
Healthcare Company
3%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
10%
Insurance Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Box?
The solution is used for data storage and any kind of visualization.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Box?
The solution is expensive when it comes to API calls.
What do you like most about IBM FileNet?
The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FileNet?
It depends on the business partner providing the solution to the customer. We have an ESA contract with IBM which allows us to offer the solution at a competitive price, providing added value when ...
What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?
The setup process is very complex, and I would prefer if it were easier. A modern interface would also be an enhancement.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GE, Toyota, P&G, Caterpillar, Flex, Schneider Electric, Sally Beauty, Eurostar, AstraZeneca, AirBnB, Whirlpool, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Nationwide, Aeropostale etc
Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Find out what your peers are saying about Box vs. IBM FileNet and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,640 professionals have used our research since 2012.