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

Box vs IBM FileNet comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Organizations using Box report efficiency in file management, reduced compliance risks, and notable returns despite some awaiting detailed calculations.
Sentiment score
6.5
IBM FileNet boosts efficiency, reduces costs and errors, enhances productivity, and offers significant financial benefits through automation and quicker access.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.9
Box customer service is generally praised, but users want improved response times and frontline expertise for better experiences.
Sentiment score
7.2
IBM FileNet's customer service is positively rated but faces challenges with resolution delays, time zones, and consultant training.
People come from all over the world, and they have specialists at the other end of the world to help if needed.
For IBM FileNet, I give a rating of nine out of ten.
The product-level support is better now than before.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
Box offers strong scalability and performance for large organizations, but some limitations appear in enterprise-level deployments and large file handling.
Sentiment score
8.6
IBM FileNet offers scalable infrastructure, seamlessly integrates with systems, and efficiently supports large data volumes and automation processes.
I am uncertain about its effectiveness at an enterprise level, where SharePoint might be preferred.
The bigger products like IBM FileNet can handle billions of documents and thousands of users.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
Box is highly stable and secure, with minimal outages, though users seek improvements in upload speed.
Sentiment score
7.7
IBM FileNet is reliable with 99.9% uptime, praised for stability, despite initial setup issues and occasional large document concerns.
Box was very stable and did not have any latency issues.
FileNet was restricted to DB2's enterprise edition instead of the standard edition, causing complications.
In terms of stability, we haven't experienced any big technical issues or downtime with IBM FileNet.
 

Room For Improvement

Box needs improved sync, search, file management, security, integration, interface, performance, permissions, API, pricing, and data recovery.
IBM FileNet needs improved integration, usability, cloud capabilities, automation, and AI features, with reduced complexity and cost.
Collaborative editing was challenging if multiple people were in a document at once.
The response time and resolution of issues by technical support need improvement.
There are only a few products large enterprises can choose from, and it doesn't really matter which one as it often depends on the consultants and the team implementing the solution.
FileNet needs improvement in pricing as it has become very expensive.
 

Setup Cost

Box pricing is initially steep but offers excellent value, with discounts and free versions available for businesses and education.
IBM FileNet's high costs and complex pricing make it a significant investment, mainly suited for larger enterprises.
The product has become more expensive and requires significant investment for enterprise solutions.
The price is high, with yearly subscriptions increasing day by day.
FileNet and similar enterprise-level tools require substantial costs, starting in the millions.
 

Valuable Features

Box provides secure file sharing, collaboration, advanced security, and seamless Microsoft integration, making it ideal for organizations.
IBM FileNet offers robust document management with automation, integration, security, and excellent compatibility with business applications for efficiency.
Box had a very easy-to-use search feature and a good user interface on its website, which was faster and better than SharePoint.
It stands out for its integration capabilities, making it a practical choice for our needs in managing content and related tasks.
At this level, companies don't buy a ready-made solution.
The main features we find impactful are the workflow and document management along with FileNet file stores.
 

Categories and Ranking

Box
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Storage (12th), Digital Asset Management (3rd), Document Management Software (3rd), Content Collaboration Platforms (5th)
IBM FileNet
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
101
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Box is 3.7%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.2%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

Shrikant Pillay - PeerSpot reviewer
Allows you to upload and download files quickly but lacks integration with Office 365
For enterprise users, the data is in a local repository. We use it for files for the end user process. This is a cloud solution. In my current organization, we have over 10,000 people using this solution. I use it very extensively. Users these days are working remotely You can upload your bin,…
Emad Rizki - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
54%
Financial Services Firm
5%
Computer Software Company
5%
Government
4%
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
10%
Insurance Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Box?
The solution is used for data storage and any kind of visualization.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Box?
The solution is expensive when it comes to API calls.
What do you like most about IBM FileNet?
The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FileNet?
The product has become more expensive and requires significant investment for enterprise solutions.
What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?
FileNet needs improvement in pricing as it has become very expensive. Also, in comparison to local solutions, the need for coding is a disadvantage.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

GE, Toyota, P&G, Caterpillar, Flex, Schneider Electric, Sally Beauty, Eurostar, AstraZeneca, AirBnB, Whirlpool, Wake Forest School of Medicine, Nationwide, Aeropostale etc
Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Find out what your peers are saying about Box vs. IBM FileNet and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.