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 7.7, while IBM is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Hyland holds a 6.7% mindshare in ECM, compared to IBM’s 10.5% 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 13 Hyland OnBase reviews

2,117 Views
1,364 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM FileNet

Read 101 IBM FileNet reviews

3,501 Views
2,225 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 845,040 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

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Process Management (BPM) (19th), Low-Code Development Platforms (14th)

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 April 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Hyland OnBase is 6.7%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.5%, up from 9.7% 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

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

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

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

"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."

"Hyland OnBase is valued for its security, especially for those in the finance domain who require data confidentiality."

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

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

"Its most valuable aspect is its flexibility"

More Hyland OnBase pros

"It has a robust API. We are able to have systems communicate with each other, and do business process automation."

"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."

"If we run into problems, which is inevitable (and we run into problems all the time), we get quick responses and good solutions back from the technical support."

"There aren't very many ECM solutions that scale properly, both up and out. We have customers who hold billions of documents. There aren't very many that can scale that far, and that can also scale out so that they can handle lots of users, lots of documents, and that understand how to handle external users. FileNet is one that can."

"The main features we find impactful are the workflow and document management along with FileNet file stores."

"The ability to manage the content well."

"Provides records management functions."

"It has improved my organization by how we release documents, claims, and policies."

More IBM FileNet pros

Cons

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

"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy. It is getting better, but it is not yet good enough. Other products are comparatively doing better in terms of the user interface. I have been hearing about Box, which is very easy to use and learn for the users. OnBase has to work on this aspect. It should have BPM capabilities. We compete with tools that provide the BPM feature and support those standards. 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."

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

"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 integration with more solutions."

"I find OnBase's monolithic architecture to be expensive, and adopting microservices could be beneficial."

"The dashboards do have some room for improvement as compared to the other vendors which are there in the market."

"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."

More Hyland OnBase cons

"I would like to have an offline DR deployment. If that is doable, then it would be a big win."

"Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document."

"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."

"We brought DocuSign into our company's solution three years before. At that time there was no direct integration. We would like to pull documents out from FileNet, push them to DocuSign and, when done, retrieve them and store them back in FileNet. We wrote our own custom solution for that. It would be nice if there was some tool we could have used to do that."

"There is some confusion with FileNet workflow. It's not really going into the next level. They are probably replacing it with BPM's workflow. So there's an issue of clarity, the vision for going forward."

"The area of migrations to new versions must be made easier. It's quite good that they have now begun to improve the API area, to modernize the interfaces, but there's always a very big investment involved in migrating from one version to another. That prohibits rolling out new functionalities to customers. It's not so easy.... In that area, they really must improve."

"Developers like us have an upgraded interface. That interface does not work in the process that we have today. It hangs and is not user-friendly."

"I think it's to the point where there are probably too many features. Every software, as it matures and graduates, grows the list of features. What many of our customers express is that it's just too complicated. They're using maybe five or ten percent of the features but they're having to pay for 100 percent. There is room for improvement in terms of simplifying it."

More IBM FileNet cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

"OnBase is reasonably priced."

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

"The tool's price is high."

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

"When it comes to pricing, IBM needs to make an effort to improve the cost. That's the main issue regarding use of FinalNet in Columbia."

"There are lots of components to the product. Make sure before you invest that you know which components you need."

"We use extraction. Therefore, we can see 80 to 85 percent accuracy on data extraction. This reduces the manual indexing part, which is definitely a gain on performance efficiency."

"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."

"The platform is inexpensive."

"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."

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

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

845,040 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Government

13%

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 14% of the time

OpenText Extended ECM vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 9% of the time

Microsoft Power Apps vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 5% of the time

More Hyland OnBase Competitors

OpenText Extended ECM vs IBM FileNet

Compared 17% of the time

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText Documentum vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

Alfresco vs IBM FileNet

Compared 7% of the time

IBM ECM vs IBM FileNet

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Hyland OnBase

March 2025

Download Hyland OnBase product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet

March 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

845,040 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.