Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet comparison

Hyland and IBM are both solutions in the Enterprise Content Management category. Hyland is ranked #6 with an average rating of 7.6, while IBM is ranked #2 with an average rating of 7.9. Hyland holds a 6.0% mindshare in ECM, compared to IBM’s 6.5% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Hyland users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 91% of IBM users who would recommend it.

Hyland OnBase

Read 13 Hyland OnBase reviews

4,371 Views
2,404 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM FileNet

Read 105 IBM FileNet reviews

4,015 Views
3,694 Comparison Views

91% willing to recommend

Hyland OnBase

IBM FileNet

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

IBM FileNet and Hyland OnBase both compete in the enterprise content management market, with FileNet taking the upper hand for organizations focused on compliance due to its stability and governance features.

Features: IBM FileNet offers robust scalability, integration with various business units, and comprehensive document management. Its automation capabilities improve business process efficiencies and enterprise search functionality. Hyland OnBase is known for its flexible modular approach, integration abilities, and excellent customization across different business functions.

Room for Improvement: IBM FileNet could improve its integration with other systems and enhance the user-friendly aspects of its Content Navigator. Hyland OnBase may benefit from a more intuitive user interface and improved integration with external applications to enhance overall usability and flexibility.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: IBM FileNet is mostly on-premises, suitable for organizations with stringent security needs, with mixed reviews on technical support responsiveness. Hyland OnBase offers both cloud and on-premises deployment, providing versatility and generally favorable support, though some users find it complex without training.

Pricing and ROI: IBM FileNet is seen as costly but justified by its powerful capabilities for large enterprises, with ROI realized over an extended period. Hyland OnBase also has a high initial setup cost but offers modular pricing for cost control and significant productivity gains contributing to a good ROI.

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

Buyer's Guide

Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 880,511 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

Hyland OnBase

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

6th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Business Process Management (BPM) (15th), Low-Code Development Platforms (12th)

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 Hyland OnBase is 6.0%, down from 6.6% 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%
Hyland OnBase	6.0%
Other	87.5%

Enterprise Content Management

Featured Reviews

reviewer1981395

Product owner at a computer software company with 10,001+ employees

Seamless data management enhances security while monolithic architecture and reporting need improvements

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, addressing some concerns. Additionally, there could be more integration points with products Hyland has acquired, such as Alfresco and Nuxeo. Offering a trial version with basic features would allow users to experience the product before purchasing. I find OnBase's monolithic architecture to be expensive, and adopting microservices could be beneficial.

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

"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."

"Hyland OnBase is valued for its security, especially for those in the finance domain who require data confidentiality."

"Integrating Hyland OnBase with our systems enabled us to automate document designs and templates, which was extremely helpful in the finance and banking industry."

"Its most valuable aspect is its flexibility"

"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."

"The product's initial setup phase is not difficult."

More Hyland OnBase pros

"FileNet is highly scalable and suited for implementation in large multinational organizations."

"FileNet can for sure cover the requirements of a medium and a big company, because of the scalability and the possibility to connect with many other IBM products."

"There is a high degree of usability with this solution. It is highly compatible with our clients' and customers' work environments, making it easy to deploy and implement."

"IBM FileNet supports our document management and compliance processes."

"One of the most valuable features is FileNet's ability to capture things from the stack, from e-mail, to scanning of Excel and Word. FileNet can also convert many types of files to PDFs very easily."

"It has an excellent document storage repository, which is good at what it does."

"Provides records management functions."

"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."

More IBM FileNet pros

Cons

"We need to troubleshoot why our reports didn't get downloaded in a day. There is a workflow feature which powerful but also complicated."

"Software malfunctioning usually occurs when we receive documents from external sources."

"The dashboards do have some room for improvement as compared to the other vendors which are there in the market."

"I find OnBase's monolithic architecture to be expensive, and adopting microservices could be beneficial."

"The solution’s initial setup is a little difficult."

"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."

"We are struggling with duplicates and would like to have OCR functionality when using this solution."

More Hyland OnBase cons

"The initial setup is complex. It is complex because there are several pieces of software that have to be installed in the right order to make it work alright."

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

"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."

"One of the things I know is a bit of a challenge for them - because I know that it lives on top of FileNet, so it's not necessarily living on top of a relational database, per se - is that we also are using it as our system of record for our language management and our language definitions. I know that that was a little bit of a challenge, just because of the underlying architecture."

"I would like to see the dashboard be a little bit more robust and a little more user-friendly"

"During the initial setup, all the details and different technical things that we were trying to figure out became complex."

"It needs better collaboration between the IBM teams on the FileNet and CCM sides."

"It may be a little complex to implement and take some effort."

More IBM FileNet cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"The solution costs around $6,000 per month."

"The tool's price is high."

"OnBase is reasonably priced."

"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."

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

"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. "

"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."

"The tool is expensive, and I rate its pricing a ten out of ten."

"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."

"1. It will be more expensive than estimated to setup. 2. You will need to double the staff while you are running the old system and installing the new system. 3. Depending on the number of documents to be migrated, make sure you understand the potentially massive amount of time and effort required to migrate the existing content to the new platform."

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

880,511 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Government

12%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Computer Software Company

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

18%

Computer Software Company

Insurance Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	8

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

Questions from the Community

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Hyland OnBase?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Hyland OnBase?

I was a vendor managing Hyland OnBase ( /products/hyland-onbase-reviews ) for Hyland, not as a direct user but as a business partner. We managed the solution and were a partner with Hyland.

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

OpenText Content Management vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 10% of the time

Alfresco vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText Documentum Content Management vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 8% of the time

SharePoint vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Power Apps vs Hyland OnBase

Compared 5% of the time

More Hyland OnBase Competitors

OpenText Content Management vs IBM FileNet

Compared 14% of the time

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 13% of the time

Alfresco vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText Documentum Content Management vs IBM FileNet

Compared 9% of the time

OpenText Content Manager vs IBM FileNet

Compared 6% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Hyland OnBase

January 2026

Download Hyland OnBase product report

Buyer's Guide

IBM FileNet

January 2026

Download IBM FileNet product report

Also Known As

OnBase

No data available

Overview

Hyland OnBase is acclaimed for its robust document management, automating workflows, and improving organizational efficiency across various industries. Praised for its ability to manage records compliantly, especially in regulated sectors like healthcare and finance, the tool also integrates smoothly with other enterprise systems. Users benefit significantly from streamlined processes, reduced manual tasks, and enhanced data accuracy, boosting productivity and customer satisfaction.

Hyland

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

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.

Buyer's Guide

Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet

December 2025

Free Report: Hyland OnBase vs. IBM FileNet

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

880,511 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Hyland OnBase 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.