Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet comparison

Hyland and IBM are both solutions in the Enterprise Content Management category. Hyland is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.0, while IBM is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Hyland holds a 6.7% mindshare in ECM, compared to IBM’s 10.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Hyland users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 91% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Hyland OnBase

Read 12 Hyland OnBase reviews

2,212 Views
1,410 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM FileNet

Read 101 IBM FileNet reviews

3,588 Views
2,318 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Hyland OnBase

IBM FileNet

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

IBM FileNet and Hyland OnBase both compete in the enterprise content management market, with FileNet taking the upper hand for organizations focused on compliance due to its stability and governance features.

Features: IBM FileNet offers robust scalability, integration with various business units, and comprehensive document management. Its automation capabilities improve business process efficiencies and enterprise search functionality. Hyland OnBase is known for its flexible modular approach, integration abilities, and excellent customization across different business functions.

Room for Improvement: IBM FileNet could improve its integration with other systems and enhance the user-friendly aspects of its Content Navigator. Hyland OnBase may benefit from a more intuitive user interface and improved integration with external applications to enhance overall usability and flexibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM FileNet is mostly on-premises, suitable for organizations with stringent security needs, with mixed reviews on technical support responsiveness. Hyland OnBase offers both cloud and on-premises deployment, providing versatility and generally favorable support, though some users find it complex without training.

Pricing and ROI: IBM FileNet is seen as costly but justified by its powerful capabilities for large enterprises, with ROI realized over an extended period. Hyland OnBase also has a high initial setup cost but offers modular pricing for cost control and significant productivity gains contributing to a good ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 841,004 peers since 2012

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

Hyland OnBase

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Process Management (BPM) (17th), Low-Code Development Platforms (13th)

IBM FileNet

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

101

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Hyland OnBase is 6.7%, up from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.6%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Content Management

Featured Reviews

Phemy Lekalakala

Manager of Information Systems at University of the Witwatersrand

Stable content and workflow management solution with a valuable retention module

We use this solution for record management and digitization of records. We also use it for workflows and to build online forms The retention module is one of the most valuable features. Whatever we scan onto the system can be identified and we are notified when the records are due to be disposed.…

Read full review

Emad Rizki

System integrator at Indépendant

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We found the setup process to be okay since they do offer a troubleshooting guide."

"It provided data security features, allowing restrictions on sensitive documents, such as who could view or modify them."

"Its most valuable aspect is its flexibility"

"OnBase is a remarkable tool. It is a well-done product. Hyland has a lot of experience in building it and looking for new things for clients in terms of functionalities. It has amazing stability, and it can grow horizontally and vertically. It is built for growth. Their technical support is also quite good and available throughout the year."

"The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities."

"The most valuable features are that it's very secure and provides audit trails for our documents."

"The product's initial setup phase is not difficult."

"The solution's most valuable features are integration and flexibility."

More Hyland OnBase pros

"It is very stable and reliable."

"Users are able to create their own content, and they can manage their own sets of tasks, to work at their own pace and get their jobs done."

"It has a very broad market share and a lot of people know about it."

"It is a faster, robust solution. The platform compatibility is very good."

"It saves our customers time by 30 to 40 percent by eliminating the time to process paper."

"There is a high degree of usability with this solution. It is highly compatible with our clients' and customers' work environments, making it easy to deploy and implement."

"We probably would not have seen adoption so strongly without it."

"The standout feature for us is undoubtedly the Google-like search functionality, which allows us to search for documents within the system effortlessly. Instead of just querying the document database, this feature retrieves all relevant documents, akin to searching on the internet. It is very easy to use."

More IBM FileNet pros

Cons

"The solution’s initial setup is a little difficult."

"We found the size of images to be a restriction, though this may have been due to the API used rather than the Hyland application."

"Software malfunctioning usually occurs when we receive documents from external sources."

"An area for improvement would be the training - getting our people up to speed on how to use it required more training than we expected due to the complexity of the solution."

"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."

"The migration is a bit difficult in the tool."

"The look and feel could be better. The integration with the user could be better. It could also be more user-friendly."

"The application could potentially be more open-source, allowing integration with more solutions."

More Hyland OnBase cons

"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."

"One of the things I know is a bit of a challenge for them - because I know that it lives on top of FileNet, so it's not necessarily living on top of a relational database, per se - is that we also are using it as our system of record for our language management and our language definitions. I know that that was a little bit of a challenge, just because of the underlying architecture."

"Currently, our primary ERP system is SAP S/4HANA. Despite this, we have encountered difficulties integrating the solution with it, which remains an unresolved challenge for our team."

"A little better control into the ACLs of FileNet and databases."

"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."

"The FileNet API seems like it is very difficult and not transparent."

"We'd like to use the docker, to have it containerized."

"The application's processing engineer needs to be more advanced."

More IBM FileNet cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is high."

"They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."

"The solution costs around $6,000 per month."

"There are a number of different types of licenses. There are concurrent licenses, individual licenses and imaging licenses."

"OnBase is reasonably priced."

"FileNet is not cheap, but you absolutely get what you pay for. "

"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."

"The tool is expensive, and I rate its pricing a ten out of ten."

"Yearly, we pay for the maintenance, which is $20,000."

"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."

"The platform is inexpensive."

"The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance."

"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."

More IBM FileNet pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Government

14%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

10%

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Hyland OnBase?

The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Hyland OnBase?

As we had an enterprise license, we were not limited in terms of user access. We also paid for workflow licenses, which allowed up to 250 concurrent users.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Hyland OnBase?

We found the size of images to be a restriction, though this may have been due to the API used rather than the Hyland application. The application could potentially be more open-source, allowing in...

See all answers

What do you like most about IBM FileNet?

The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FileNet?

The product has become more expensive and requires significant investment for enterprise solutions.

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?

FileNet needs improvement in pricing as it has become very expensive. Also, in comparison to local solutions, the need for coding is a disadvantage.

See all answers

Comparisons

Alfresco vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 20% of the time

OpenText Documentum vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 14% of the time

SharePoint vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 13% of the time

OpenText Extended ECM vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 9% of the time

Microsoft Power Apps vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 6% of the time

More Hyland OnBase Competitors

OpenText Documentum vs IBM FileNet

Compared 17% of the time

OpenText Extended ECM vs IBM FileNet

Compared 17% of the time

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

Alfresco vs IBM FileNet

Compared 7% of the time

Newgen OmniDocs vs IBM FileNet

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Hyland OnBase

February 2025

Download Hyland OnBase product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet

February 2025

Download IBM FileNet product report

Also Known As

OnBase

No data available

Overview

Hyland OnBase is acclaimed for its robust document management, automating workflows, and improving organizational efficiency across various industries. Praised for its ability to manage records compliantly, especially in regulated sectors like healthcare and finance, the tool also integrates smoothly with other enterprise systems. Users benefit significantly from streamlined processes, reduced manual tasks, and enhanced data accuracy, boosting productivity and customer satisfaction.

Hyland

IBM FileNet is a leading IBM enterprise content management product family. IBM FileNet is one of the ECM solutions that can change the way a company does business by enabling users to capture, activate, socialize, analyze, and govern content throughout its lifecycle.

There are many IBM FileNet products available, all of which are integrated and based on the FileNet P8 Platform.

IBM

Sample Customers

Honda France Industries, Hill County Texas, Hylant Group, ING Lease France, State of South Carolina, Syracuse University, Swindon College, Rhode Island Department of Human Services, Rochester Institute of Technology, Moen, Odense University Hospital

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.

Buyer's Guide

Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet

March 2025

Free Report: Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet

Find out what your peers are saying about Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

841,004 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet report.

See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise Content Management 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.