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

DocuShare 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

DocuShare
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
18th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM FileNet
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of DocuShare is 0.5%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.0%, up from 10.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

RW
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.
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.

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."
"FileNet is very user-friendly... We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them."
"FileNet is highly scalable and suited for implementation in large multinational organizations."
"It has increased our productivity."
"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."
"​Streamlined our business processes."
"The API's extensibility and new user interface are its most valuable features."
"It provides good stability and scalability for huge enterprises as well."
"The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management."
 

Cons

"The user interface could be improved."
"I would like to have more governance features with more supervisory layers."
"Developers like us have an upgraded interface. That interface does not work in the process that we have today. It hangs and is not user-friendly."
"Needs a better administration tool."
"I would like to see expanded search features, like content search."
"The setup process is very complex."
"I would love it if single sign-on was a lot easier to set up. That's the most difficult part of it."
"We know that they're looking at documents, but we don't know what documents they're actually going and finding the most, or where the bottlenecks might be. It would be nice if there was some interconnectivity back into Bluemix to say, "Ok, you've got a workflow problem here." That would be a neat feature moving forward because we've got a lot of users that would just say, "The system is not working." We had a few threads would get hung up because they were just constantly banging on these few documents. If that were the case, if we knew that ahead of time, then we could fix that, change the search sequences to make it more efficient. But we were blind to that until the users said it's not working."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The physical space that we have gained back pays for the service. Therefore, it has reduced our operating costs overall. We have definitely seen ROI. I would estimate $30,000 a year."
"FileNet is not cheap, but you absolutely get what you pay for. ​"
"Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage."
"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."
"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."
"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."
"The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance."
"The tool is expensive, and I rate its pricing a ten out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
23%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
10%
Insurance Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with DocuShare?
The user interface could be improved.
What is your primary use case for DocuShare?
We use the solution for electronic document filing.
What advice do you have for others considering DocuShare?
Version control interface is very good. The new releases of DocuShare incorporate significant advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and language processing capabilities. For in...
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?
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...
What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?
The API provided by IBM FileNet is a very out-of-date implementation. From the beginning, we cannot use a REST API; we have to use the IBM FileNet native API, which is quite outdated.
 

Overview

 

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.
Find out what your peers are saying about DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
859,129 professionals have used our research since 2012.