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

Alfresco vs OpenText Content Manager vs OpenText Documentum Content Management 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Alfresco is 8.6%, up from 7.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 5.0%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Documentum Content Management is 10.6%, down from 11.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
OpenText Documentum Content Management10.6%
OpenText Content Manager5.0%
Alfresco8.6%
Other75.8%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

Karthi Keyan - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamlining document management with enhanced digitalization features needed
We used Alfresco as a document management system for automating and digitizing manual forms. Those were the main use cases The digitalization of workflow, forms, operations, and business processes has improved our organization. The most valuable features of Alfresco include its integration with…
Maurice Riverso - PeerSpot reviewer
Our our official repository and it has disposal management and retention management
The security architecture is the only problem as it's a little bit complex and too torturous at times. So it could be improved a little bit, but it is regarded as a very good system in Australia. It's probably overly subscribed. Also, what's missing is what people would like, which is basically online collaboration. That's a problem. But it has so many other things to offer that SharePoint, I'm sure, will not have. So, that will be an interesting issue to come up. It's not very good at providing stable and robust add-ins to Microsoft. That's a bit of a problem with Content Manager. They're kind of very volatile. So, that's been definitely something that could be improved.
Salih çakır - PeerSpot reviewer
User-friendly content management but needs more customizations
We use OpenText Documentum for managing the command life cycle and for content management Documentum helps by saving time during daily operations. The product is user-friendly. The BPM side should be improved. It would be beneficial to have more ability to customize features for specific use…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"You can meet your users' expected features without having Alfresco's involvement."
"The most valuable features of Alfresco include its integration with the scanning solution, the ability to search, and the capability to store and index to capture metadata."
"I like the ease of use, sections, and calendar."
"Alfresco allows broad searches with many index fields that you can search on, although the created fields and their values may not be intuitive."
"The product allows engineering teams and developers to introduce new things in a seamless and easy way."
"Document repository."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the searching elements of the metadata."
"The digitalization of workflow, forms, operations, and business processes is also significant."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"The tool's implementation has made life easier for customers. It is sold by SAP. The integration between SAP and the solution is good, making it easy to access the documents. It is widely recognized as a market leader in enterprise document management."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"The most valuable features of OpenText Content Manager are its stability, reliability, security, and workflow engine."
"For a records management system, Content Manager is a really good system."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"The most valuable feature is that it's a central repository for everything, whether it's videos, documents, Excel sheets, etc."
"The product is tamper-proof and enables us to return to the document source, which is helpful in legal issues."
"Documentum is a highly scalable document management solution because it's built on a solid platform."
"OpenText Documentum has improved availability and performance in our organization."
"It stands out for its impressive records management capabilities and the ability to handle an extensive volume of documents, even reaching into the billions."
"We primarily use it for storing documents. We host a variety of documents in OpenText Documentum. This includes raw files, analyzed files, and documents in multiple formats."
"The product is user-friendly."
"It is quite good."
 

Cons

"Alfresco has a very steep learning curve, and unfortunately, during the learning process, it's very easy to make errors, which often are unforgiving."
"Metadata, auto class, disposition log, and legal hold."
"Alfresco could improve workflow digitalization and enhance artificial intelligence capabilities."
"Currently, documents in Alfresco are stored on a file server, which, while good for performance, is a security risk."
"I would like them to consider document capture functionality."
"The configuration of Alfresco is a big challenge."
"I think the presentation layer could be improved - currently, it's too complex, and there are too many features cluttered all over the screen."
"The setup process for Alfresco was complex."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"It's not very good at providing stable and robust add-ins to Microsoft."
"Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"One area for improvement in OpenText Documentum is its handling of outdated documents, especially technical ones."
"In BPM could be better. Its GUI needs the ability to build more rules. This is a crucial feature. For example, OpenText has some products that allow you to control your checks, invoices, and so on. They have exciting approaches to converting pictures to text, but the tool for business process management isn't easy to use. The GIU is not so good."
"Sometimes DocBroker cannot see the DocBase."
"The interface of OpenText Documentum could be more intuitive; sometimes it is hard to find where the information is located."
"It should provide more tools to help clients upgrade solutions based on Webtop."
"OpenText Documentum has a lot of scope for improvement in terms of adding some AI integrations."
"The user interface can be a bit more intuitive."
"OpenText Documentum is moving to the cloud, and I am concerned about the security aspect of it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is cheaper compared to head-to-head competitors."
"The license for Alfresco is expensive - not the maximum, but close. There are also extra costs once you start building integrations, as implementation seems to be very costly."
"There are costs for any upgrade or additional functions."
"If you buy Alfresco through a partner, there is usually a OEM licensing option."
"I would suggest that you do a thorough evaluation of all competing products and look for support for these products in your local area."
"I rate the product price an eight or nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The solution is expensive."
"The solution's licensing cost depends on the customer domain. Though its costs are high, the product is worth the money. You have to pay a one-time cost and support costs."
"The fees incurred are for the licensing and maintenance."
"It is quite an expensive product."
"OpenText Documentum's pricing is good."
"OpenText Documentum has announced a new licensing model, which could be more expensive."
"The price is considered affordable now."
"It falls in line with a lot of things that are out there on the market. There is nothing extraordinary in terms of great or bad."
"The product is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Educational Organization
6%
Government
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Government
13%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise3
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business10
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise28
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Alfresco?
The pricing of Alfresco starts at $100,000, which can be expensive for small projects. There is often a transition fr...
What needs improvement with Alfresco?
Currently, the challenge is the general availability to users. Initially, they had poor documentation, but over the y...
What is your primary use case for Alfresco?
This is mainly for unstructured document management systems with workflow and data classification.
What do you like most about Micro Focus Content Manager?
An advantage is integration with your IP directory.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is a disadvantage as it is very expensive, especially in this market.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive. Support and services need to be more user-friendly. The support has been...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Documentum?
It falls in line with a lot of things that are out there on the market. There is nothing extraordinary in terms of gr...
What do you like most about OpenText Documentum?
The most valuable feature of Documentum for our content management needs is its ability to segregate access based on ...
What needs improvement with OpenText Documentum?
The interface of OpenText Documentum could be more intuitive; sometimes it is hard to find where the information is l...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Content Manager, HPE Records Manager, HPE Content Manager
Dell EMC Documentum, Documentum , Documentum xCelerated Composition Platform
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Over 1,300 companies from 180 different countries. Including EuroStar, Saks Fifth Avenue, NASA Langley Research Center, and KLM.
Missouri State Courts
Agility; Bibliotheca Alexandrina; Capitec Bank; Department of Social Development, Republic of South Africa; County of Los Angeles, Department of Human Resources; Fresenius Kabi; Heathrow Airport; Lahey Health; Linde PLC; Milestone Pharma Co. Ltd; National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development; Open Grid Europe GmbH; REPCO NEX Industrial Solutions; Springer Nature; Syngene International; Tata Power DDL; University of Texas Austin
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, IBM and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: August 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.