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

OpenText EnCase eDiscovery vs Smarsh eDiscovery comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.2
OpenText EnCase eDiscovery scales with enterprise needs via presentation, back-end, and storage components, supporting small to large enterprises.
No sentiment score available
 

Valuable Features

Sentiment score
8.9
OpenText EnCase eDiscovery offers advanced search, data recovery, customizable EnScripts, and AI features for enhanced user experience.
No sentiment score available
 

Room For Improvement

Sentiment score
7.8
Users suggest enhancing mobile acquisition, email indexing, data ingestion, reporting, keyword search, and support in EnCase eDiscovery.
No sentiment score available
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is generally stable and reliable, but users report occasional UI bugs and image processing delays.
No sentiment score available
 

Customer Service

No sentiment score available
OpenText EnCase eDiscovery customer service has mixed reviews, needing improvement in responsiveness and efficiency to satisfy users.
No sentiment score available
 

Setup Cost

No sentiment score available
OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is generally considered a worthwhile investment despite varied pricing and the need for multiple licenses.
No sentiment score available
 

Categories and Ranking

OpenText EnCase eDiscovery
Ranking in eDiscovery
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Smarsh eDiscovery
Ranking in eDiscovery
11th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the eDiscovery category, the mindshare of OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is 3.6%, down from 8.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Smarsh eDiscovery is 3.6%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
eDiscovery
 

Featured Reviews

Alejandro Stromer - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable and scalable hybrid solution with easy setup
The solution is scalable. It has three levels. You have the presentation area that can be escalated to the balance sheet. You have the back-end area that can be escalated using higher viability to configure more application servers. Also, the area of storage can be increased. We usually cater to enterprise solutions but have small- and medium-sized customers. It starts with 25 users and goes up to 100s and 1000s.
Use Smarsh eDiscovery?
Share your opinion
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which eDiscovery solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
15%
Energy/Utilities Company
9%
Government
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenText EnCase eDiscovery?
I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.
What is your primary use case for OpenText EnCase eDiscovery?
We have experience in engineering and capital projects. It is an add-on to extend project and asset management documentation.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

EnCase eDiscovery
Micro Focus eDiscovery, Autonomy eDiscovery, HPE Autonomy eDiscovery, HPE eDiscovery, Actiance
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ontario Ministry of Government, Aerospace Company, Chesterfield Police Department
Bank AlJazira, MTS India, Vodafone Ireland
Find out what your peers are saying about Google, Commvault, Microsoft and others in eDiscovery. Updated: November 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.