DocuShare vs IBM FileNet comparison

Xerox and IBM are both solutions in the Enterprise Content Management category. Xerox is ranked #20 with an average rating of 7.0, while IBM is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.9. Xerox holds a 0.9% mindshare in ECM, compared to IBM’s 6.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Xerox users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 91% of IBM users who would recommend it.

DocuShare

Read 4 DocuShare reviews

374 Views
348 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM FileNet

Read 105 IBM FileNet reviews

4,015 Views
3,694 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

DocuShare

IBM FileNet

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

DocuShare and IBM FileNet are competing in the document management space. While FileNet offers a comprehensive feature set and greater scalability, making it suitable for large-scale implementations, DocuShare shines in affordability and customer support satisfaction.

Features: DocuShare provides straightforward document sharing, collaboration, and user-friendly interface, appealing to small to mid-sized enterprises. IBM FileNet offers advanced workflow automation, extensive integration capabilities, and robust security features, catering to enterprises with complex content management requirements.

Room for Improvement: DocuShare could enhance its scalability options, add more advanced automation features, and improve integration capabilities with other enterprise solutions. IBM FileNet may benefit from simplifying its user interface, improving ease of use for non-technical users, and reducing deployment complexity.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM FileNet has a complex deployment process requiring careful planning but offers robust customer service to manage challenges. DocuShare provides a simpler deployment model with intuitive implementation and accessible support for quicker deployment.

Pricing and ROI: DocuShare offers a competitive setup cost, appealing to budget-conscious organizations with quick ROI. IBM FileNet demands a higher upfront investment but offers significant long-term ROI through efficiency improvements and expansive capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

DocuShare

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

20th

Average Rating

7.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

IBM FileNet

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

105

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of DocuShare is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 6.5%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Content Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
IBM FileNet	6.5%
DocuShare	0.9%
Other	92.6%

Enterprise Content Management

Featured Reviews

R Williams

Software Analyst at Altron

The new releases incorporate significant advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and language processing capabilities

Version control interface is very good. The new releases of DocuShare incorporate significant advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and language processing capabilities. For instance, when you upload a document into DocuShare, you no longer need to set up templates to identify and extract important fields. The system automatically reads the document and identifies key information. For example, in a contract document between two entities, it can recognize the contract start date, end date, reference number, and other relevant details without manual intervention. This automated process streamlines document management. You should know your requirements and understand your environment, as well as the goals you want to achieve. Try out the demo first to see if it fits your needs and objectives before making a decision. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Read full review

Shankar-Kambhampaty

Consulting CTO at a tech consulting company with 1-10 employees

Business workflows have been automated and document processes are streamlined at large scale

I believe IBM FileNet could be improved or enhanced in the future, specifically the user interface development support, which, despite all the improvements, still feels from the 2010s or 2000s. The current state of the user interface development support and the ability to customize it leaves much to be desired. The backend engine, process engine, and object engine are fantastic. However, the user interface, which is required to provide an impressive experience to the user, is difficult to build. IBM will need to do something about this area. Over time, IBM has made improvements with enhancements through CP4BA and other tools, with which user interfaces can be built. But there is much more is needed. The initial setup process for IBM FileNet requires specialists. IBM FileNet is not a click-click-click deploy kind of product. It has several components that need to be installed in different versions and in a particular order. Additionally, IBM Cloud does not provide a proper experience. The problem is I cannot use IBM Cloud easily. I cannot even get a membership easily. With AWS, I just use my credit card, sign up, and I am done. With IBM Cloud, that is not how it is. They go through all validation processes, and it is a nightmare at times. There are problems around IBM FileNet, not exactly with IBM FileNet itself, but the point is that it is not a click-click-click deploy either on the cloud or on-premise. It requires specialists, and there is a big learning curve toward deploying and managing the whole infrastructure as well as the software. I communicate with the technical support of IBM frequently. I have communicated several times, and frankly, there is much to be desired on that side. When you raise a ticket, it takes 24 to 48 hours for them to respond. We live in a time where business moves at the speed of light. Twenty-four hours is a very long time. You need to be able to get technical support instantaneously. It is not like the more contemporary support models where you get turnaround in minutes, not days.

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 software development kit can be customized."

"There aren't very many ECM solutions that scale properly, both up and out. We have customers who hold billions of documents. There aren't very many that can scale that far, and that can also scale out so that they can handle lots of users, lots of documents, and that understand how to handle external users. FileNet is one that can."

"The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable."

"The most valuable feature for me is the possibility to share and to collaborate, the possibility to connect FileNet with many other IBM products as well. It helps avoid the possibility of creating "island applications." We have an ecosystem where everything can be interconnected."

"We are able to find the proper documents which are needed for business processes."

"It is a user-friendly system and easy to manage for anyone with basic knowledge."

"It is very user-friendly for business users. They can create their own searches. They are not dependent on administrators to create searches for them. It is self-service for them."

"Stability is really good. We fairly recently upgraded a version of it and have not been having any problems. The resources seem to be really good with this version; it is a little easier to troubleshoot issues."

"It provides good stability and scalability for huge enterprises as well."

More IBM FileNet pros

Cons

"The user interface could be improved."

"The usability is fair. It could be a bit better. It could be better designed. They could put more effort into the user experience and do a better job of integrating other components, like Datacap, to be a bit more seamless."

"If there was more AI capability, into Watson, that would be a benefit."

"The initial setup was pretty complex. There are too many options, and it can get a bit confusing."

"We brought DocuSign into our company's solution three years before. At that time there was no direct integration. We would like to pull documents out from FileNet, push them to DocuSign and, when done, retrieve them and store them back in FileNet. We wrote our own custom solution for that. It would be nice if there was some tool we could have used to do that."

"The application's processing engineer needs to be more advanced."

"The response time and resolution of issues by technical support need improvement."

"It was complex. There were a lot of dependencies depending on the product. It had to be compatible with the Windows matching."

"We would like to have more automation of rollout solutions."

More IBM FileNet cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."

"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."

"The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance."

"We use extraction. Therefore, we can see 80 to 85 percent accuracy on data extraction. This reduces the manual indexing part, which is definitely a gain on performance efficiency."

"The licensing cost of FileNet is comparable."

"For small scale industries, they allow different options. They can do open source. It is the complexity of the data security that they should think about before they choose."

"For the medium scale or large scale, I would recommend FileNet. FileNet is free of licensing expenses, thus good for the money. It is not expensive, but worth for the money, especially for medium scale and large scale industries."

"There are lots of components to the product. Make sure before you invest that you know which components you need."

More IBM FileNet pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

Government

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	32
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	74

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with DocuShare?

The user interface could be improved.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for DocuShare?

We use the solution for electronic document filing.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering DocuShare?

See all answers

What do you like most about IBM FileNet?

The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FileNet?

From the company's perspective, the licensing cost for IBM FileNet is still affordable. Though the license cost is somewhat expensive, it remains manageable. The company rates it between 3 and 5 be...

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?

We almost do not utilize the automation capabilities of IBM FileNet to streamline our business processes. The process automation and business automation features are barely used. Currently, we prim...

See all answers

Comparisons

SharePoint vs DocuShare

Compared 54% of the time

Hyland OnBase vs DocuShare

Compared 28% of the time

Alfresco vs DocuShare

Compared 18% of the time

More DocuShare Competitors

OpenText Content Management vs IBM FileNet

Compared 14% of the time

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 13% of the time

Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

Alfresco vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText Documentum Content Management vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

January 2026

Download DocuShare product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet

January 2026

Download IBM FileNet product report

Overview

Xerox DocuShare's Content Management System gives you the easiest method to manage all of your paper and digital documents

Xerox

IBM FileNet is a leading IBM enterprise content management product family. IBM FileNet is one of the ECM solutions that can change the way a company does business by enabling users to capture, activate, socialize, analyze, and govern content throughout its lifecycle.

There are many IBM FileNet products available, all of which are integrated and based on the FileNet P8 Platform.

IBM

Sample Customers

Lincoln Public Schools, West Orange School District, Tulane University, Niagara Catholic School District, Arig, Co-operative Financial Services, Mizuho Capital Markets Corporation, Volksbank Romania and Iron Mountain, Hammersmith Hospital, Holman Insurance Brokers Ltd., Kaiser Permanente, Convergys Inc., Honeywell, Universal Pictures, McGraw Hill Construction Information Group

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.

Buyer's Guide

DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet

December 2025

Free Report: DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet

Find out what your peers are saying about DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet report.

See our list of best Enterprise Content Management vendors.

We monitor all Enterprise Content Management 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.