We changed our name from IT Central Station: Here's why

Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Hyland OnBase Logo
3,229 views|2,475 comparisons
IBM FileNet Logo
8,841 views|4,641 comparisons
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"I like the cloud and its integrability.""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."

More Hyland OnBase Pros →

"I like the security and also the configuration. It is easy to configure and most of our business use cases have everything just with the configuration itself."

More IBM FileNet Pros →

Cons
"The look and feel could be better. The integration with the user could be better. It could also be more user-friendly.""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."

More Hyland OnBase Cons →

"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."

More IBM FileNet Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "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."
  • More Hyland OnBase Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
    564,643 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: 
    I like the cloud and its integrability.
    Top Answer: 
    The look and feel could be better!!!
    Top Answer: 
    We use Hyland OnBase for knowledge management.
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Ranking
    Views
    3,229
    Comparisons
    2,475
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    444
    Rating
    N/A
    Views
    8,841
    Comparisons
    4,641
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    457
    Rating
    7.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    OnBase
    Learn More
    Overview
    OnBase enterprise content management software combines integrated document management, business process management and records management in a single application. Whether deployed as a hosted or premises-based solution, OnBase allows organizations to automate business processes and reduce the time and cost of performing important business functions through the management and control of content.

    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.

    Offer
    Learn more about Hyland OnBase
    Learn more about IBM FileNet
    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.
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company29%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    Financial Services Firm9%
    Government7%
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm33%
    Insurance Company17%
    Healthcare Company11%
    Comms Service Provider8%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Computer Software Company31%
    Comms Service Provider14%
    Financial Services Firm10%
    Insurance Company9%
    Company Size
    No Data Available
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business24%
    Midsize Enterprise12%
    Large Enterprise65%
    Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Box, OpenText and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: January 2022.
    564,643 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Hyland OnBase is ranked 12th in Enterprise Content Management with 2 reviews while IBM FileNet is ranked 6th in Enterprise Content Management with 1 review. Hyland OnBase is rated 0.0, while IBM FileNet is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Hyland OnBase writes "A remarkable all-in-one platform with amazing stability and scalability and good technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "Offers good security but the interface hangs and isn't user-friendly". Hyland OnBase is most compared with OpenText Content Suite Platform, SharePoint, Alfresco, Hyland Perceptive Content and OpenText Documentum, whereas IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText Content Suite Platform, OpenText Documentum, IBM ECM and Newgen OmniDocs.

    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.