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

IBM FileNet vs OpenText Content Manager 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

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
OpenText Content Manager
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
7th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
File Archiving (4th), Document Management Software (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.4%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 4.1%, up from 3.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Maurice Riverso - PeerSpot reviewer
Our our official repository and it has disposal management and retention management
The security architecture is the only problem as it's a little bit complex and too torturous at times. So it could be improved a little bit, but it is regarded as a very good system in Australia. It's probably overly subscribed. Also, what's missing is what people would like, which is basically online collaboration. That's a problem. But it has so many other things to offer that SharePoint, I'm sure, will not have. So, that will be an interesting issue to come up. It's not very good at providing stable and robust add-ins to Microsoft. That's a bit of a problem with Content Manager. They're kind of very volatile. So, that's been definitely something that could be improved.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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 product is very stable."
"It has an excellent document storage repository, which is good at what it does."
"It allows for multiple people to access content simultaneously."
"The usability is very good. We like the Content Navigator. It's very easy to use the search and retrieve for documents and has a lot of options for the user to download documents or send an email."
"IBM FileNet has improved our organization with its single collaboration space."
"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."
"I would say the workflow is pretty good. Also, the flexibility of being able to create custom objects with a lot of domain-specific attributes that we follow."
"For a records management system, Content Manager is a really good system."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"The tool's implementation has made life easier for customers. It is sold by SAP. The integration between SAP and the solution is good, making it easy to access the documents. It is widely recognized as a market leader in enterprise document management."
"The most valuable features of OpenText Content Manager are its stability, reliability, security, and workflow engine."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
 

Cons

"The initial setup is complex. It is complex because there are several pieces of software that have to be installed in the right order to make it work alright."
"I think some of the technical pieces, when implementing it ourselves, were something of a roadblock until we discovered the Concierge. Those are some things they have to work on."
"FileNet and similar enterprise-level tools require substantial costs, starting in the millions, which limits their use to large enterprises."
"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."
"The setup process is very complex."
"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."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"IBM doesn't offer new technologies every year, they offer new technologies after five years, for each release of the product."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive."
"It's not very good at providing stable and robust add-ins to Microsoft."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"For the medium scale or large scale, I would recommend FileNet. FileNet is free of licensing expenses, thus good for the money. It is not expensive, but worth for the money, especially for medium scale and large scale industries."
"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."
"Talking about the cost is difficult because IBM has offers that combine different products, and each of these offers has different types of licensing. IBM also has a policy that the actual price for a given customer may be very different from the stated book price. It's hard to say whether it's expensive or not."
"1. It will be more expensive than estimated to setup. 2. You will need to double the staff while you are running the old system and installing the new system. 3. Depending on the number of documents to be migrated, make sure you understand the potentially massive amount of time and effort required to migrate the existing content to the new platform."
"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."
"FileNet is not cheap, but you absolutely get what you pay for. ​"
"Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage."
"The fees incurred are for the licensing and maintenance."
"I would suggest that you do a thorough evaluation of all competing products and look for support for these products in your local area."
"I rate the product price an eight or nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The solution is expensive."
"The solution's licensing cost depends on the customer domain. Though its costs are high, the product is worth the money. You have to pay a one-time cost and support costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
10%
Insurance Company
9%
Government
19%
Computer Software Company
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
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.
What do you like most about Micro Focus Content Manager?
An advantage is integration with your IP directory.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is a disadvantage as it is very expensive, especially in this market.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive. Support and services need to be more user-friendly. The support has been slow, and there is room for improvement. Additionally, they could improve build...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Content Manager, HPE Records Manager, HPE Content Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Missouri State Courts
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FileNet vs. OpenText Content Manager and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
838,713 professionals have used our research since 2012.