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

GeneXus vs Hyland OnBase comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 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

GeneXus
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
20th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Mobile Development Platforms (10th)
Hyland OnBase
Ranking in Low-Code Development Platforms
12th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (16th), Enterprise Content Management (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Low-Code Development Platforms category, the mindshare of GeneXus is 0.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Hyland OnBase is 1.4%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Low-Code Development Platforms
 

Featured Reviews

XavierEspinoza - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers a simplified architecture with outstanding integration capabilities
The integration capabilities of GeneXus are highly valuable for our organization. The metadata obtained within the logic of different systems is also vital. Due to the solution, our company team doesn't have to work with multiple languages and integrations can be made with C Sharp. JavaScript can also be used with GeneXus, the tool takes charge of all the rest and has a simple architecture. The solution can be used out of the box without facing any issues and nothing much needs to be done with frameworks. In our case we need to use Python with GeneXus, we use Ironpython to embed python code in C# .
Srinivas Rao Kagitha - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers good dashboards and reports but fails to offer better migration features
The migration is a bit difficult in the tool. Whenever we make certain changes to workflow or other stuff, migrating the code from one environment to another is a bit tedious. The tool has an option for export and import, which is not robust. Most of the time, we need to do things stuff manually. For example, if we make any changes in the existing life cycle or any queues, we have to move those changes manually. There is no robust way to migrate code from one environment to a lower environment, like prod. When it comes to the product's technical support, the turnaround time is a bit longer than expected. The issue may be because there are a number of issues or a large number of customers who are reaching out to the support team for help. I believe that the solution's technical team can provide a solution more quickly.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is that GeneXus works with several languages. It's possible to develop chatbots and other functionalities."
"I like that it's very compatible with other tools. The most important feature is getting the developer to focus on the project's business case. It's not about focusing on how I can command this or how I can develop a front end, or how I can work with the advantages. The developer should focus on the business case of the project. No need to focus on connecting the database to the server or connecting the server and the front end. The developer can concentrate on the views."
"With GeneXus, we can create logical representations of transactions in the form of objects."
"This solution works extremely quickly in terms of enabling an application in a production environment."
"The integration module is the most valuable feature of this solution for our business, as it allows our clients to create new systems based on their outdated databases, across all API's."
"I find the implementation process of GeneXus to be easy."
"With the solution, I can work a normal day. I can plan my work and any other activities for days ahead."
"GeneXus evolves with technology."
"OnBase is a remarkable tool. It is a well-done product. Hyland has a lot of experience in building it and looking for new things for clients in terms of functionalities. It has amazing stability, and it can grow horizontally and vertically. It is built for growth. Their technical support is also quite good and available throughout the year."
"I like the cloud and its integrability."
"The most valuable features are that it's very secure and provides audit trails for our documents."
"The retention module is one of the most valuable features. Whatever we scan onto the system can be identified and we are notified when the records are due to be disposed."
"Its most valuable aspect is its flexibility"
"The solution's most valuable features are integration and flexibility."
"We found the setup process to be okay since they do offer a troubleshooting guide."
"Hyland OnBase is valued for its security, especially for those in the finance domain who require data confidentiality."
 

Cons

"It's expensive for a company."
"There are issues in integrating it with other solutions."
"We would like to see more extensions and more user controls added to the front-end of this solution, in order to help developers manage the website."
"Code generation is highly time-consuming for GeneXus"
"The front-end with GeneXus is not as good as the back-end."
"It would be helpful to have additional assisted processing with training."
"It would be better if GeneXus had a wiki. The developer needs some experience to work with the tools. It would be better if they could improve the community. If we have some problem, I open a ticket that takes us to a board, and I have to describe my issue in detail. If the tools have a general community for us to explore with some videos or some articles, I think that that may help the developer."
"GeneXus's user interface has room for improvement."
"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy. It is getting better, but it is not yet good enough. Other products are comparatively doing better in terms of the user interface. I have been hearing about Box, which is very easy to use and learn for the users. OnBase has to work on this aspect. It should have BPM capabilities. We compete with tools that provide the BPM feature and support those standards. They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."
"I find OnBase's monolithic architecture to be expensive, and adopting microservices could be beneficial."
"We found the size of images to be a restriction, though this may have been due to the API used rather than the Hyland application."
"The solution’s initial setup is a little difficult."
"Software malfunctioning usually occurs when we receive documents from external sources."
"The migration is a bit difficult in the tool."
"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."
"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is good."
"It's expensive. I'd rate it a four out of ten in terms of pricing."
"The cost of a GeneXus license is extremely high. At the same time, one person using the solution can do the work of three Java or data developers. I think that's why they charge so much. It's too expensive, which is one reason it isn't widely used."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten"
"I don't know about the price because I am an employee, but I hear it's cheaper than other tools."
"I know that its licenses are generally per year, and in the past, the license for GeneXus was around $5,000, but I don't know what's the current price of the GeneXus license."
"I give the cost of the solution a four out of ten."
"The price is good."
"The solution costs around $6,000 per month."
"OnBase is reasonably priced."
"The tool's price is high."
"They can do better in terms of the pricing model. It is a really expensive tool in Latin America. They should have different prices for different regions."
"There are a number of different types of licenses. There are concurrent licenses, individual licenses and imaging licenses."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Low-Code Development Platforms solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Energy/Utilities Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Government
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GeneXus?
GeneXus evolves with technology.
What needs improvement with GeneXus?
GeneXus needs to be more consistent in functionality without any errors. Code generation is highly time-consuming for GeneXus, but in some cases, it saves time as well. Some errors will take too lo...
What is your primary use case for GeneXus?
Our company uses the latest version of GeneXus. The solution is used in our company to develop various enterprise systems, and GeneXus is used as an integrator, which further facilitates low-cost d...
What do you like most about Hyland OnBase?
The solution is very developed and we are not taking full advantage of its functionalities.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Hyland OnBase?
I find pricing to be on the higher side due to its monolithic architecture. I would rate it six out of ten. Transitioning to microservices, allowing users to pay for only what they use, could reduc...
What needs improvement with Hyland OnBase?
I believe the reporting features need improvement, as other competitors in the market provide better analytics. Hyland is working on a new platform (HXP) to integrate features from all products, ad...
 

Also Known As

No data available
OnBase
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Canal de Panamá, Gerdau, Coca-Cola, Mercado Libre, DHL, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, TECNISA, Mexican Polak Group, Ferrovalle, Canon, Azteca, KPMG, TURBUS, Santander, BBVA
Honda France Industries, Hill County Texas, Hylant Group, ING Lease France, State of South Carolina, Syracuse University, Swindon College, Rhode Island Department of Human Services, Rochester Institute of Technology, Moen, Odense University Hospital
Find out what your peers are saying about GeneXus vs. Hyland OnBase and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.