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

Hyland OnBase 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

Hyland OnBase
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Business Process Management (BPM) (14th), Low-Code Development Platforms (15th)
IBM FileNet
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
104
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Hyland OnBase is 5.7%, down from 6.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 6.0%, down from 10.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM FileNet6.0%
Hyland OnBase5.7%
Other88.3%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

Arjurn Dakash - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Manager at Deloitte
Workflow automation has transformed case management and reduced errors across our processes
Hyland OnBase is a great tool for document storage and retrieval, automating business processes using workflow, and building applications in WorkView. It saves a lot of time, reduces human errors, and is very cost-effective. Hyland OnBase has drastically improved our business processes and made everyone's jobs easier. Hyland OnBase is a fantastic system that does a lot for my organization. We use it for indexing and storing documents as the main reason we use Hyland OnBase, but it also has many features that we use every day. Workflows are the most common way that our employees interact with Hyland OnBase. We also ingest thousands of documents every day, and with our continued rate of growth, we do not see Hyland OnBase having any trouble handling the added traffic. It is very scalable. The best features Hyland OnBase offers include workflows, document retention and security, document ingesting and indexing, and document retrieval and storage. The user-friendly interface makes it very easy to use and provides a smooth learning curve for new users. Workflow is used to quickly and easily configure and improve business processes. We also have automation through workflow, which saves time and cost. Reporting dashboards allow us to create useful reports to keep personnel informed, making data-driven decisions easier. While we have grown a lot over the past five years, Hyland OnBase has allowed us to maintain our existing workflows rather than hiring additional employees, requiring fewer employees thanks to Hyland OnBase. Since Hyland OnBase is our central repository for all documents, our documents are more secure, allow greater work flexibility, especially for remote work, are more easily accessible, and are smarter. It has changed the way we as a company work. Through workflow automation, we have been able to save a lot of time, with forty to fifty-five percent of time being saved currently.
Shankar-Kambhampaty - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"Hyland OnBase is valued for its security, especially for those in the finance domain who require data confidentiality."
"This solution is easy to implement and easy to use as long as you know what your business requirement are or the specifications are straightforward."
"The impact of Hyland OnBase on our organization is that automating manual processes has had an incredible effect on our return on investment, and the man-hours saved by automating processes pays for the system, ranging from one to five hours."
"Hyland OnBase has drastically improved our business processes and made everyone's jobs easier."
"The product's initial setup phase is not difficult."
"We found the setup process to be okay since they do offer a troubleshooting guide."
"The solution's most valuable features are integration and flexibility."
"We helped them implement an IBM product suite with FileNet content management with workflow and analytics, which helped that company reduce processing costs, unify processes in 21 countries, and serve as an IT framework to integrate other companies they acquire."
"There are a lot of valuable features, but the biggest advantage is that this system is stable; it's always online, it always works... once it's configured and running, we don't need to touch it and constantly make changes to it. It's a low-maintenance platform."
"The most valuable feature is access control."
"Our leads completion process used to take two to three days, it now takes half a day."
"FileNet is very user-friendly... We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them."
"We use FileNet to store all our content, and with a quarter of a billion documents stored it works great for us."
"One of our clients, a customer of IBM, rolled out and replaced their existing ECM system with FileNet, and their productivity has increased pretty dramatically."
"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."
 

Cons

"As an ECM solution, there are a lot of improvements needed. For example, the web client should address the next generation of web technologies such as HTML5 and stylish layout."
"For user experience, they would have to do more with the interface. It is not easy to work with and is a little messy."
"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."
"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."
"Hyland OnBase can be improved by reducing the many different applications that need to be used when being an administrator for this product."
"Hyland OnBase could be improved in terms of service support response time."
"An area for improvement would be the training - getting our people up to speed on how to use it required more training than we expected due to the complexity of the solution."
"Hyland OnBase can be improved because Report Services is an additional license and should be included with the base product."
"The most valuable features of IBM File Manager are workflow, content, and process capabilities."
"If I had a concern, it would be that we are sometimes not getting to the root cause of the issues from a technical standpoint as quickly as we should. For the most part, it's good. However, when things get a bit dicey with more involved issues, we have had some delays in getting feedback. If I had a concern, it's around the technical support and their responses in regards to things like root cause analysis."
"I think the support could be better, and it could improve."
"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."
"However, the configuration does take a long time. Every company needs its own configuration design."
"Technical support was not excellent, but very good."
"We would like to see, in FileNet, the ability to manage video and audio.​"
"We brought DocuSign into our company's solution three years before. At that time there was no direct integration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is high."
"The solution costs around $6,000 per month."
"There are a number of different types of licenses. There are concurrent licenses, individual licenses and imaging licenses."
"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."
"OnBase is reasonably priced."
"Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage."
"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."
"FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too."
"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."
"Talking about the cost is difficult because IBM has offers that combine different products, and each of these offers has different types of licensing. IBM also has a policy that the actual price for a given customer may be very different from the stated book price. It's hard to say whether it's expensive or not."
"The licensing cost of FileNet is comparable."
"The platform is inexpensive."
"The solution saves time and money. It helps us to be able to accomplish the goals of our business, as opposed to being tangled in the weeds of what we could do."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Marketing Services Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise13
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise74
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Hyland OnBase?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is very cost-effective and affordable.
What needs improvement with Hyland OnBase?
Hyland OnBase could be improved in terms of service support response time. More timely updates to solution software support documentation also should be improved.
What is your primary use case for Hyland OnBase?
Hyland OnBase is used across the entirety of the organization in a variety of different ways, and its primary use is as a document storage solution that is used in conjunction with other systems su...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FileNet?
The pricing and licensing of IBM FileNet is high. We are living in a world where the minimal license from IBM costs anywhere from seventy-five thousand to one hundred thousand US dollars, depending...
What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?
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...
What is your primary use case for IBM FileNet?
My usual use cases for IBM FileNet involve three primary areas. The first is document management. For instance, if you have an insurance application, you can store all the documents required to pro...
 

Also Known As

OnBase
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

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
Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
885,789 professionals have used our research since 2012.