No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Digital Safe vs OpenText Content Manager 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Digital Safe
Ranking in File Archiving
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Content Manager
Ranking in File Archiving
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Content Management (9th), Document Management Software (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the File Archiving category, the mindshare of Digital Safe is 5.4%, up from 4.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 6.6%, up from 6.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
File Archiving Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Content Manager6.6%
Digital Safe5.4%
Other88.0%
File Archiving
 

Featured Reviews

it_user948 - PeerSpot reviewer
digital strategist at SMD Services
Solid product, functionally rich, but complex.
The message archiving tool is very powerful and can handle many search / flagging scenarios, as well as numerous message types (SMS, E-mail, bloomberg, etc). With flexibility comes complexity. The solution is very complex and requires significant configuration. If hosting…
Maurice Riverso - PeerSpot reviewer
Records Management Officer at ANZPAA
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The message archiving tool is very powerful and can handle many search / flagging scenarios, as well as numerous message types (SMS, E-mail, Bloomberg, etc)."
"This is a wonderful product with many options."
"My advice to others is that they cannot go wrong with the solution."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"The product is valuable generally due to its wide use and acceptance in the public sector in my region."
"Go for it."
"The product allows us to run our Notice of Destructions seamlessly and produces our annual folders with ease."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"There many ways that this application has improved our organization. The most significant is the reduction in paper generation and the ability to electronically annotate and manage all our documents."
 

Cons

"With flexibility comes complexity. The solution is very complex and requires significant configuration."
"The system is difficult to navigate and understand the full scope of functionality available for end users to appreciate the value."
"Functionality gets removed as new versions are released."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"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."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"I would like to see an improvement in the licensing process. It is very complicated and it seems to involve many different people throughout the entire process."
"This web client requires more refinement to be viable as a desktop client replacement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"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 fees incurred are for the licensing and maintenance."
"I would suggest that you do a thorough evaluation of all competing products and look for support for these products in your local area."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File Archiving solutions are best for your needs.
909,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Construction Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 slow, and there is room for improvement. Additionally, they could improve build...
What is your primary use case for Micro Focus Content Manager?
We are a system integrator. We deal with client requirements to determine the best solutions that should be deployed. Our primary use case for OpenText Content Manager is managing enterprise conten...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Digital Safe, Autonomy Zantaz, HPE Autonomy Zantaz, HPE Digital Safe
Micro Focus Content Manager, HPE Records Manager, HPE Content Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EDF, Morgan Stanley, RateCity, Missouri State Courts
Missouri State Courts
Find out what your peers are saying about Veritas, OpenText, Quest Software and others in File Archiving. Updated: July 2026.
909,679 professionals have used our research since 2012.