Digital Safe vs OpenText Content Manager comparison

Smarsh and OpenText are both solutions in the File Archiving category. Smarsh is ranked #8, while OpenText is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.5. Smarsh holds a 4.3% mindshare in FA, compared to OpenText’s 4.6% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Smarsh users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 86% of OpenText users who would recommend it.

Digital Safe

Read 1 Digital Safe review

246 Views
244 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

OpenText Content Manager

Read 23 OpenText Content Manager reviews

2,771 Views
249 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

Digital Safe

OpenText Content Manager

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Digital Safe and OpenText Content Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Commvault, Veritas, OpenText and others in File Archiving.

To learn more, read our detailed File Archiving Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

File Archiving

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,286 peers since 2012

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

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

OpenText Content Manager

Ranking in File Archiving

4th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Enterprise Content Management (9th), Document Management Software (4th)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the File Archiving category, the mindshare of Digital Safe is 4.3%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 4.6%, down from 5.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

File Archiving Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
OpenText Content Manager	4.6%
Digital Safe	4.3%
Other	91.1%

File Archiving

Featured Reviews

it_user948

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…

Read full review

Maurice Riverso

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.

Read full review

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)."

"Sharing of documents, reduction of duplication, and the ability to manage retention, disposition and overall records management have been significant benefits for our organization."

"The most valuable features of OpenText Content Manager are its stability, reliability, security, and workflow engine."

"Customer Service: We appreciate HPE's team of resources, who assist us as issues arise."

"The product can be integrated with different solutions."

"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."

"Eliminated the need for paper records."

"We are required to have a robust Records Management system, and it does this job."

"HPE Content Manager 9, and its predecessors, is an excellent EDRMS with a strong emphasis on record lifecycle and compliance with government standards."

Cons

"With flexibility comes complexity. The solution is very complex and requires significant configuration."

"Technical support is very frustrating. It is difficult to get a good response from HPE and even more difficult to find anyone that can really help us with the product."

"This system eats up a lot of staff time for support, administration, and use."

"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."

"We've had it for a year now, and since we started implementation it has been, to say softly, a nightmare."

"Users are intimidated by the Content Manager client application, especially when it comes to searching and managing content at an individual’s level."

"The system is difficult to navigate and understand the full scope of functionality available for end users to appreciate the value."

"The product could improve its scalability."

"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."

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 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."

"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 fees incurred are for the licensing and maintenance."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File Archiving solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Government

13%

Financial Services Firm

Manufacturing Company

University

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	6
Large Enterprise	8

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What do you like most about Micro Focus Content Manager?

An advantage is integration with your IP directory.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

ZL Unified Archive vs Digital Safe

Compared 28% of the time

Atempo Digital Archive vs Digital Safe

Compared 24% of the time

Oracle SAM-FS vs Digital Safe

Compared 16% of the time

Veritas Enterprise Vault vs Digital Safe

Compared 16% of the time

More Digital Safe Competitors

SharePoint vs OpenText Content Manager

Compared 13% of the time

Alfresco vs OpenText Content Manager

Compared 11% of the time

IBM FileNet vs OpenText Content Manager

Compared 7% of the time

OpenText Content Management vs OpenText Content Manager

Compared 6% of the time

Microsoft Purview Data Lifecycle Management vs OpenText Content Manager

Compared 6% of the time

More OpenText Content Manager Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

File Archiving

February 2026

Download Digital Safe product report

Buyer's Guide

OpenText Content Manager

March 2026

Download OpenText Content Manager product report

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

Autonomy Zantaz is a highly scalable and flexible archiving platform that enables your organization to capture and preserve email messages, attachments, and files in a way that both optimizes storage and allows immediate access for discovery and review by courts, regulators, administrators, and end-users. Powered by IDOL, EAS automates the processing of enormous volumes of information, dynamically exposing the patterns, linkages and meaning within.

Smarsh

OpenText Content Manager, formerly Records Manager, is a governance-based enterprise content management system designed to help government agencies, regulated industries and global organizations manage their business content from creation to disposal. Regardless of how you create and collaborate on your content, Content Manager gives you the ability to leverage accurate, contextual, and complete information throughout its lifecycle. Managing your content in this way helps you significantly improve services to your customers, business decisions and insight for future strategy.

OpenText

Sample Customers

EDF, Morgan Stanley, RateCity, Missouri State Courts

Missouri State Courts

Find out what your peers are saying about Commvault, Veritas, OpenText and others in File Archiving. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,286 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best File Archiving vendors.

We monitor all File Archiving reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.