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
11th
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
7th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
CRM (21st), Field Service Management (2nd), Help Desk Software (12th), ERP (12th), Activity Based Costing Software (7th), Enterprise Asset Management (EAM) (2nd), Local Government CRM (9th), IT Asset Management (10th), IT Service Management (ITSM) (11th), License Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Customer Experience Management category, the mindshare of Adobe Web Experience Management is 1.9%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IFS Cloud Platform is 2.7%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
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.
Brendan Fisher - PeerSpot reviewer
Robust, customizable, and modern
IFS is a very large and complex software, and implementation of IFS can be challenging and may lead to a difficult lengthy project. It can take between 12 and 24 months in some cases to deploy. I have found that not all clients are fully aware of how big the task is that they're undertaking when they make a decision to move to software like this. Companies need to be more aware of the complexity of an ERP implementation project and while I fully recommend moving to IFS, it is not easy and does require business change when adopting an ERP solution. New features are a difficult ask - I work across multiple industries and everyone would probably choose a different feature. Maybe BIM in Construction or Customs link-ups for importers/exporters.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Good content and digital management capabilities."
"The most valuable features of IFS Applications in the latest version are the new user Arena interface. It's from Apps 9, but it brings more flexibility in usage, especially around different devices, such as mobile usage, which doesn't restrict you from using a computer. We are it for the HR side, and it's proving quite good. It has a new modern feel to it similar to a standard cloud application which enhances the user experience."
"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."
"We could quickly understand what was going on and what the customer wanted to do."
"The main reason for the ERP project was to bring together our fourteen sites, which had until then worked in separate silos."
"When it comes to financing, the solution has helped us to concentrate finance functions like accounting processes in one system. This includes about 70 internal entities around the world."
"I like the connectivity and interfaces. In V10, it's easy to modify the interfaces and layouts, but it's becoming more complicated in the cloud. IFS is excellent at asset maintenance and incident management. They have specialized modules for IFS that cover incident and asset management and everything else connected to finance. The reporting in IFS is also easy to use."
"IFS has been completely rebuilt, modernized, and cloud-based so we don't need bulky software installations."
"The financial posting controls are quite handy. The user interface is really friendly, highly flexible, and pretty intuitive for end users."
 

Cons

"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."
"Unable to handle very large video files."
"I'm a business analyst, so I do a lot of customer-facing work. I take calls from businesses I have to troubleshoot. One thing that bugs me is the error messages you get from IFS. If I get an error message, I have to dig to find the cause because, often, the error message doesn't precisely describe the problem. It'll hint about where the problem lies, but you have to work to find the root cause. It doesn't help in my situation. You expect an error message to point to the field or what is causing the issue."
"Some kind of bot assistance, some kind of artificial intelligence to help people solve the problems, would be interesting."
"IFS Applications is not robust enough to handle high-volume transactions, so it's not suitable for larger enterprises."
"There are some stability issues."
"Ability to place approval check-points in the custom workflow, so clients can decide what they want it."
"There are certain digital features that need to be incorporated, such as IOP."
"We would like to see AI-driven CSI functions built into the tool that would allow us to quickly tie our improvement goals to metrics and activities, so Assyst will suggest the next steps to help us get closer to our goals."
"The user interface can be improved. When you're clicking through the screens, there are some icons or symbols that really need updating and would be more useful and noticeable if they are aesthetically pleasing."
 

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."
"Ask for all-inclusive pricing, as they are pretty flexible if you ask for custom models."
"I consider it to be a well-priced solution compared to other mid-range or high-end ERP solutions."
"Licensing is on an annual basis, with no additional costs."
"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."
"There's an additional yearly cost for support."
"The additional cost that comes with the solution includes the overhead of the people who are trying to fix the tool issues. These people are trying to reproduce the issue and report it to the technical support and testing with them which is huge. It is the cost of quality in the end."
"We pay for a license to use the solution, which is not very expensive."
"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.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
20%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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?
I am not able to recall much about batch. Documentation-wise, they need more. There is not much available online, and the documentation availability is on the lower side compared to other products,...
 

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: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.