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

Adobe Web Experience Management vs IFS Cloud Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 4, 2025

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

Adobe Web Experience Manage...
Ranking in Customer Experience Management
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IFS Cloud Platform
Ranking in Customer Experience Management
9th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
31
Ranking in other categories
CRM (27th), Field Service Management (2nd), Help Desk Software (17th), ERP (17th), Activity Based Costing Software (7th), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) (4th), Local Government CRM (13th), IT Asset Management (11th), IT Service Management (ITSM) (14th), License Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Customer Experience Management category, the mindshare of Adobe Web Experience Management is 1.9%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IFS Cloud Platform is 2.4%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Customer Experience Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IFS Cloud Platform2.4%
Adobe Web Experience Management1.9%
Other95.7%
Customer Experience Management
 

Featured Reviews

Syed Hasan - PeerSpot reviewer
It has a lot of features, and it is very easy to learn, use, integrate, and manage
It would be better if it also supports some styling. Currently, whenever we have to do design for a particular client according to their brand strategy, it takes a good amount of effort. Adobe never focuses on this area. They say that you design your pages, templates, etc. If they can define common components or a common section of the style sheet so that if you want to have a button by default, you can go and just mention the specifications, such as the color code, and those specifications are automatically followed across the whole site or multiple sites according to the brand strategy. Such functionality will be helpful because currently, it takes a lot of effort to manage them separately. They can increase the number of components in terms of combinations. For example, if I take an image and a text component, currently, Adobe gives you just an image and text component. It should provide multiple versions, such as image, text, and video. That's because, on most of the sites, clients always come up with this combination. They want to have a video. They want to have an image, and they want to have some text. There could be options to have any of the following combinations: * The image on the left, the video on the right, and the text at the bottom. * The image on the left, the video on the right, and the text at the top. * The image in the center, the video on top, and the text at the bottom. If they can come up with such permutations and combinations, it will make the work easier. It will help us in putting out the site in a faster way, instead of us having to do the regular development every time. They can come up with some out-of-the-box components to help you drag and drop a video that will be displayed in a particular player. Currently, some of the features are not available, and we have to customize them. They can look into the top video players that are being used by most of the end-users from a location and provide out-of-the-box components. They can look into the features of YouTube, Vimeo, and other top players.
Thangaraj Ramasamy - PeerSpot reviewer
Has supported project management and business customization through strong modular flexibility
The cloud feature in IFS Cloud Platform is predominantly valuable, especially the enterprise asset management module, which IFS has very good business into, along with strong finance, project management, and supply chain management modules; these are the major modules that are performing well with IFS, and the cloud options along with user-friendly customizations for any technical developments are additional advantages. The integration of IoT with IFS Cloud Platform is performing well, enabling us to integrate with predominantly any third party through the standard inbuilt connectors that are readily available, and if we need to customize the integration, we can certainly do that too.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Good content and digital management capabilities."
"The templates and components that come out of the box are very helpful, especially in terms of the content fragments and experience fragments. Every client would like to have some templates and components, and they would like to cut down the effort of having to create every component that's customized. So, they try to use them out of the box. Other than that, the user roles and permissions workflows, third-party integrations, and system integration are the features that are very important."
"All the modules are valuable in their own right, but everything has to go through the ERP. IFS has done an excellent job integrating the various modules to complete these processes. My expertise is in the finance module, but I have used the other verticals. It's an all-around good product."
"The platform is reliable and stable."
"IFS Applications' best feature is the user-friendly interface that has a .NET Framework application in the front end and an Oracle database and WebLogic middleware."
"Having a young talented programmer, during the six years of use, we were able to save around 75 000 EUR preparing simple modifications using customization rather than ordering them in IFS / Partner."
"The best feature is the maintenance module, which is essentially an industry-specific workflow designed with a manufacturing module as per industry standards. It's very precise and specific without having complex functionalities. It's straightforward. Field Service Management is definitely a wonderful product that IFS has developed because it caters to field services. The energy and utility sectors can answer their business needs using the software."
"The workflow of the solution is very good."
"Feature-wise, I like the way it provides inventory details...It is a stable solution."
"There are fewer fields on the user screen compared to other products. This makes the UI a little bit easier to understand."
 

Cons

"Unable to handle very large video files."
"It would be better if it also supports some styling. Currently, whenever we have to do design for a particular client according to their brand strategy, it takes a good amount of effort. Adobe never focuses on this area. They say that you design your pages, templates, etc. If they can define common components or a common section of the style sheet so that if you want to have a button by default, you can go and just mention the specifications, such as the color code, and those specifications are automatically followed across the whole site or multiple sites according to the brand strategy. Such functionality will be helpful because currently, it takes a lot of effort to manage them separately."
"Documentation-wise, they need more."
"Customization needs to be improved."
"IFS Applications is not robust enough to handle high-volume transactions, so it's not suitable for larger enterprises."
"The CRM was shaky and although this improves in Apps 10, there is room for improvement."
"The solution's initial setup process was complex...The technical support my company receives from the implementation partners of the solution is not that great."
"IFS uses Crystal Report mostly, which isn't too user-friendly. Developing reports isn't easy and requires a lot of dev time. Since SAP bought it, Crystal Report has become more complicated to use on IFS. You have a dashboard for reporting that is good, but it's incomplete. Most of our clients use Power BI or some additional tooling for BI."
"The support provided by IFS Applications has room for improvement. I'm based in Poland, and when my company had an issue, finding people from IFS to give my company the support it needed was difficult."
"We have upgraded to the latest version right now. We have issues with the quality. We tried to enroll in their Evergreen program which was meant to help us adopt any service update or anything that the tool’s providers come up with."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's definitely an expensive solution, but it comes with a lot of features and scalability. As compared to other content management systems that we have in the market, AEM is the costliest one. There is no hidden or additional fee."
"Compared to SAP, the pricing for IFS Applications was very affordable. People using the solution would find that it's worth the money."
"Licensing is on an annual basis, with no additional costs."
"Ask for all-inclusive pricing, as they are pretty flexible if you ask for custom models."
"IFS Applications are competitive in terms of pricing compared to other vendors, such as SAP, Oracle, and Epicor. They are generally cheaper, especially for licensing costs."
"The pricing of the solution may appear to be expensive for smaller companies with only tens of users; however, for larger and mid-size industrial companies, IFS is able to win deals and the pricing is competitive in the market."
"There's an additional yearly cost for support."
"IFS Applications is expensive software, but it's on par with SAP and Oracle. It's for large enterprises and government entities and not for small and medium-sized enterprises. They have one licensing model, but if you want to have a module-specific license, they provide component-based licenses. Unlike SAP and Oracle, it doesn't have different levels of licensing. It's one level of licensing."
"There are varying license levels that you can purchase."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Customer Experience Management solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business14
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about IFS Applications?
Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine or ten out of ten since it is an extremely scalable solution that can be used for various use cases with thousands of users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IFS Applications?
The product is reasonably priced. The costs are justified by the value provided, considering the comprehensive features and minimal need for customization. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten.
What needs improvement with IFS Applications?
When it comes to AI, I feel that is the area where we expect something more from IFS Cloud Platform. They are working on IFS AI, but we have not explored much into that yet, and if they want to kee...
 

Also Known As

No data available
IFS Applications, Assyst, IFS Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Rundfunk Berlin-Brandenburg, University of Georgia, The University of Auckland, Dalhousie University, KfW Bankengruppe, IG Group, National Australia Bank, Investec, New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT), Swiss Federal Railways (SBB), Singapore Tourism Board, European Southern Observatory (ESO)
China Airlines, Electrolux Group, Babcock, Cimcorp, Sky, Multiplex, Veolia. 
Find out what your peers are saying about Adobe Web Experience Management vs. IFS Cloud Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.