IBM FileNet vs Oracle Content Management comparison

IBM and Oracle are both solutions in the Enterprise Content Management category. IBM is ranked #4 with an average rating of 7.9, while Oracle is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.5. IBM holds a 10.1% mindshare in ECM, compared to Oracle’s 2.5% mindshare. Additionally, 91% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Oracle users who would recommend it.

IBM FileNet

Read 99 IBM FileNet reviews

3,951 Views
2,539 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Oracle Content Management

Read 3 Oracle Content Management reviews

820 Views
693 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM FileNet

Oracle Content Management

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

IBM FileNet and Oracle Content Management compete in the enterprise content management market. Oracle Content Management often has the upper hand with its superior features, such as advanced integrations and cloud capabilities.

Features: IBM FileNet focuses on strong document management, workflow automation, and emphasizes security and compliance. Oracle Content Management offers collaboration, seamless cloud integration, and flexibility, making it appealing for scalability in modern IT environments. The main difference is IBM's process-driven tasks focus compared to Oracle's cross-platform functionality emphasis.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM FileNet is known for complex on-premise setups requiring dedicated resources, which can delay deployment. Oracle Content Management benefits from cloud-based deployments, facilitating quicker setup and greater accessibility. Oracle generally provides more agile and responsive customer service compared to IBM.

Pricing and ROI: IBM FileNet has higher initial setup costs due to its infrastructure-heavy demands but offers well-regarded ROI from efficient high-volume transaction processing. Oracle Content Management provides competitive pricing with lower upfront costs through its cloud model, enhancing short-term ROI. IBM emphasizes long-term value while Oracle delivers faster initial ROI benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM FileNet vs. Oracle Content Management Report (Updated: December 2024).

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet vs. Oracle Content Management

December 2024

Download the complete report

Helped 824,067 peers since 2012

Categories and Ranking

IBM FileNet

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Oracle Content Management

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

11th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Document Management Software (8th)

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.1%, up from 9.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Content Management is 2.5%, down from 2.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Content Management

Featured Reviews

WolfgangPichler

Senior Consultant at pITsolutions e.U.

Provides a compact solution for midsized companies

IBM does not do very good marketing for FileNet. Initially, after IBM acquired the product, there was good marketing support, but this has dwindled as IBM has lost personnel. More could be done to highlight the benefits to customers. Additionally, there are no visually appealing interfaces or apps for the product, which can influence customer buying decisions.

Read full review

Neilsen Seixas

Owner at NSTEC

Streamlines document management and enhances collaboration through its robust features and intuitive interface

It's a comprehensive solution for managing documents within our organization's management framework. It employs document management methodologies. The personalization and customization capabilities of Oracle Content Management system are highly praised by customers. When they receive responses using this solution, the feedback is overwhelmingly positive. Customers love the ability to customize and personalize Oracle products to suit their needs. Integrating three Oracle products into one seamless solution enhances the user experience, making it easier for end-users to engage without being aware of the individual products involved. They simply interact with the solution, streamlining their digital processes. One significant challenge that our customers faced before implementing Oracle Content Management was effectively managing a large volume of documents. They struggled with centralizing document storage and organization. However, Oracle Content Management provided a solution by centralizing document management, making it easier and more efficient to handle. The user experience, especially in terms of simplicity and design of the Oracle Content Management interface, was a priority. I utilized the Oracle Content Management API for this purpose, ensuring seamless integration with other solutions. We consolidated three solutions into one user interface through the Oracle portal, which incorporated BPM and DPM for task management. This unified interface provided a streamlined experience for customers, rather than directly interacting with the Oracle Content Management interface. Our main challenge in implementing this was using ADF from Oracle. At the time, there was a scarcity of programmers skilled in the ADF framework in Brazil, necessitating in-house training for our team of developers to successfully execute the integration.

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

"The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable."

"The product has helped with compliance and governance issues. There are some archiving policies which a financial organization has to keep. Our organization can keep up with them because of the IBM product."

"The beauty is the response time. It is very good nowadays within the platform."

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

"We have probably cut out at least 40 percent of what the work process was by easing out that whole distribution of paper."

"The important features to me are that it is stable, scalable, and the integration between this platform and the other platforms is very good."

"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."

"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."

More IBM FileNet pros

"The product's initial setup phase was easy."

"It's a comprehensive solution for managing documents within our organization's management framework."

Cons

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

"There is room for improvement in the scanning solution, Datacap. It's improving all the time. But since it's more an end-user software, the end-users are constantly improving their processes, and I believe that sometimes we're not catching up with their requirements."

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

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

"It is ability to display legacy content needs improvement."

"I would like to have more governance features with more supervisory layers."

"For end-users there is a lack of administrative features. The interface of basic FileNet is not very good."

"However, the configuration does take a long time. Every company needs its own configuration design. It depends on how many applications are connecting to FileNet. It can take a long time, depending on the application count."

More IBM FileNet cons

"Oracle Content Management poses complexities in initial implementation and configuration."

"The only issue my company has with the tool is the licensing part, which is expensive."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"For small scale industries, they allow different options. They can do open source. It is the complexity of the data security that they should think about before they choose."

"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."

"The solution saves time and money. It helps us to be able to accomplish the goals of our business, as opposed to being tangled in the weeds of what we could do."

"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 licensing cost of FileNet is comparable."

More IBM FileNet pricing and cost advice

"The tool's licensing part is 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

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

22%

Government

12%

Computer Software Company

11%

Insurance Company

Government

16%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Computer Software Company

Educational Organization

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?

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 ...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

What do you like most about Oracle Content Management?

It's a comprehensive solution for managing documents within our organization's management framework.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Oracle Content Management?

The only issue my company has with the tool is the licensing part, which is expensive.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Oracle Content Management?

I utilize Oracle Content Management to collaborate on the documents.

See all answers

Comparisons

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 17% of the time

OpenText Documentum vs IBM FileNet

Compared 17% of the time

OpenText Extended ECM vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

IBM ECM vs IBM FileNet

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

Oracle WebCenter vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 40% of the time

SharePoint vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 26% of the time

Adobe Experience Manager vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 18% of the time

OpenText Extended ECM vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 8% of the time

Microsoft OneDrive vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 7% of the time

More Oracle Content Management Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet

December 2024

Download IBM FileNet product report

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

December 2024

Download Oracle Content Management product report

Also Known As

No data available

Oracle Document and Process Cloud, Oracle Content and Experience Cloud

Learn More

IBM

Oracle

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.

Oracle Content and Experience Cloud is a cloud-based content hub to drive omni-channel content management and accelerate experience delivery.

Sample Customers

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

TekStream Solutions LLC, NetCompany, AFG, Pride Mobility, TEAM Informatics Pty Ltd., Sutton Tools, Mythics, Inc., DVLA

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet vs. Oracle Content Management

December 2024

Free Report: IBM FileNet vs. Oracle Content Management

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FileNet vs. Oracle Content Management and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.

DOWNLOAD NOW

824,067 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM FileNet vs. Oracle Content Management 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.