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 #10 with an average rating of 8.5. IBM holds a 10.4% 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 100 IBM FileNet reviews

3,679 Views
2,383 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Oracle Content Management

Read 3 Oracle Content Management reviews

773 Views
656 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: January 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet vs. Oracle Content Management

January 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 838,713 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

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

Oracle Content Management

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

10th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Document Management Software (8th)

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 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

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

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

"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 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."

"FileNet is very user-friendly... We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them."

"FileNet can for sure cover the requirements of a medium and a big company, because of the scalability and the possibility to connect with many other IBM products."

"There are a lot of valuable features, but the biggest advantage is that this system is stable; it's always online, it always works... once it's configured and running, we don't need to touch it and constantly make changes to it. It's a low-maintenance platform."

"It allows for multiple people to access content simultaneously."

"It is used by large enterprises. It has to be scalable and robust for them to use. We have seen that on multiple projects over the years."

"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

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

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

Cons

"In terms of functionality, what customers might be looking for is a little more in terms of native-records retention. Records Management is an add-on product. If there were just a little more of that built into the core functionality, that would be helpful."

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

"It was complex. There were a lot of dependencies depending on the product. It had to be compatible with the Windows matching."

"It could be simpler to use, considering multiple use cases."

"I think the support could be better, and it could improve."

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

"I would like IBM to improve with each release, continue moving towards a continual, tighter integration, and build solutions that take advantage of all the different modules the platform has from one place."

"We would like to see, in FileNet, the ability to manage video and audio."

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

"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."

"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."

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

"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."

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

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

"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."

"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."

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

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

Government

16%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

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

OpenText Extended ECM vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText Documentum vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

Alfresco vs IBM FileNet

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

Oracle WebCenter vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 39% of the time

SharePoint vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 24% of the time

Adobe Experience Manager vs Oracle Content Management

Compared 21% 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

February 2025

Download IBM FileNet product report

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

January 2025

Download Oracle Content Management product report

Also Known As

No data available

Oracle Document and Process Cloud, Oracle Content and Experience Cloud

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

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

Oracle

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

January 2025

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: January 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

838,713 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.