IBM FileNet vs M-Files comparison

The compared IBM and M-Files solutions aren't in the same category. IBM is ranked #4 in ECM , with an average rating of 8.0, and holds a 10.5% mindshare in the category. M-Files is ranked #7 in DMS , and holds a 8.7% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 75% of M-Files users who would recommend it.

IBM FileNet

Read 101 IBM FileNet reviews

3,501 Views
2,225 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

M-Files

Read 2 M-Files reviews

263 Views
200 Comparison Views

75% willing to recommend

IBM FileNet

M-Files

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between IBM FileNet and M-Files based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, IBM and others in Enterprise Content Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Enterprise Content Management Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 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

IBM FileNet

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

101

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Content Management (4th)

M-Files

Average Rating

9.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Document Management Software (7th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Content Management solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM FileNet is designed for Enterprise Content Management and holds a mindshare of 10.5%, up 9.7% compared to last year.
M-Files, on the other hand, focuses on Document Management Software, holds 8.7% mindshare, up 5.9% since last year.

Enterprise Content Management

Document Management Software

Featured Reviews

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

Laurie NYlund

Director of IT at JH Kelly

Good workflows, and it is easy to use with a dashboard that improves contract visibility

My advice for anybody who is looking into implementing this product is to do a pilot first. After you do your research, do an actual pilot before you commit because everyone has nuances and you might find out that it is not what you want, or that it doesn't really do what you think it's going to do. It is not the simplest product to use but because of the robustness of its feature set in the ability with the workflows, and the APIs, to do just about anything you can imagine with it, that's very valuable. I wish it was a little easier to use because we have to spend more time than I'd like with new users, teaching them how it works. We try to hide all that from them but the setup time to get everything the way we wanted was probably two months. That is two months in one resource working on it half time a week, but it just took a lot of work to get the metadata set up, to get the workflows set up, and to get all the documents added to the repository. Now we've got versioning and we know where everything's at, the dashboard is great, but don't assume when they tell you that you'll be up and running in two weeks, that that is the truth. It takes much longer than you think. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

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

"One of the most valuable features is FileNet's ability to capture things from the stack, from e-mail, to scanning of Excel and Word. FileNet can also convert many types of files to PDFs very easily."

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

"For a large company, for the robustness, stability, performance, and the growth — that you can grow it within seconds — I would advise using FileNet, without any doubt."

"It is very stable and reliable."

"The ability to tag data, as it seems to be indexed well. It is a good space to manage data, keep track of it, and organize it."

"[The most valuable features are] scalability and ease of use. These features are important because the customer where we have deployed it has millions of documents... And over the last five years, the volume of the documents has been increasing. It's handling all of them and without any errors."

"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."

"The integration feature of IBM FileNet is most effective for document management."

More IBM FileNet pros

"Using M-Files means anybody on the executive team to go in and immediately look at a dashboard and know the status of a contract."

Cons

"There is no room for improvement in the current version of FileNet, and I have not identified any potential new features or existing problems that require attention."

"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."

"The usability is fair. It could be a bit better. It could be better designed. They could put more effort into the user experience and do a better job of integrating other components, like Datacap, to be a bit more seamless."

"I would like to see in FileNet integrated with Watson, which can read something and send it without any human contact or interaction."

"If there was more AI capability, into Watson, that would be a benefit."

"Sometimes, there can be issues with the database connections. FileNet has too many outages because things are broken in the database."

"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."

More IBM FileNet cons

"The integration with other products needs to be improved."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too."

"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 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."

"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."

"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."

"Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage."

"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."

More IBM FileNet pricing and cost advice

"They have an Optical Character Scanning module but we didn't buy it because it's ridiculously expensive."

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

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

10%

Insurance Company

Educational Organization

17%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

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

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

OpenText Extended ECM vs IBM FileNet

Compared 17% of the time

OpenText Documentum vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 15% of the time

Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

Box vs IBM FileNet

Compared 5% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

SharePoint vs M-Files

Compared 36% of the time

Microsoft Purview Records Management vs M-Files

Compared 15% of the time

OpenText Documentum vs M-Files

Compared 13% of the time

OpenText Extended ECM vs M-Files

Compared 6% of the time

DocuWare vs M-Files

Compared 6% of the time

More M-Files Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet

March 2025

Download IBM FileNet product report

Buyer's Guide

Document Management Software

March 2025

Download M-Files product report

Overview

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

M-Files is the leading platform for knowledge work automation. With M-Files, knowledge workers can find information faster, work smarter, and achieve more. M-Files features an innovative metadata-driven architecture, embedded workflow engine, and advanced artificial intelligence that enable customers to eliminate information chaos, improve process efficiency, and automate security and compliance. By embedding automation and GenAI into its core, M-Files' platform not only increases efficiencies for organizations but also empowers knowledge workers to focus on what truly matters—innovation and strategic growth. With 10 global offices, M-Files serves more than 5,000 customers in 100 countries. Start your free trial OR Schedule a demo. For more information, visit www.m-files.com.

M-Files

Sample Customers

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

Crowe UK, Stearns Bank, Head Energy, OMV, TK Elevator

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

March 2025

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, IBM and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.