IBM FileNet vs Kiteworks comparison

Read 13 Kiteworks reviews

248 Views
181 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM FileNet

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

Kiteworks and IBM FileNet compete in content management and secure file sharing solutions. Kiteworks may offer more favorable pricing and support options, while IBM FileNet boasts a comprehensive feature set that may justify its higher cost.

Features: Kiteworks provides secure file sharing, email protection, and compliance-focused integration. IBM FileNet offers document management, advanced analytics, and content lifecycle governance.

Room for Improvement: Kiteworks could improve its scalability for larger enterprises, enhance analytics capabilities, and expand integrations. IBM FileNet can simplify its deployment process, reduce setup complexity, and offer more competitive pricing plans.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Kiteworks is known for straightforward deployment and attentive customer support, appealing to organizations needing quick setup. In contrast, IBM FileNet requires a more complex deployment process; however, it is supported by robust customer service channels.

Pricing and ROI: Kiteworks presents a lower setup cost, making it cost-effective with a focus on security and compliance. IBM FileNet demands higher initial investment but offers significant ROI through its scalability and comprehensive feature set for large enterprise environments.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM FileNet vs. Kiteworks Report (Updated: April 2025).

IBM FileNet vs. Kiteworks

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 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

IBM FileNet

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

101

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Kiteworks

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

14th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Email Security (27th), Managed File Transfer (MFT) (9th), Content Collaboration Platforms (14th), Secure Email Gateway (SEG) (11th)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.2%, up from 9.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kiteworks is 1.1%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Content Management

Featured Reviews

Emad Rizki

System integrator at Indépendant

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.

Read full review

Sukkanta Banerjee

Senior Software Engineer at Wipro Limited

Two-factor authentication and .ZIP format make large file transfers very secure

The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth. Also, only the .ZIP format is supported because it is a very secure mode of file transfer, and that is why it is recommended. It also has built-in antivirus, so if it detects any malware it will quarantine the file and it won't be delivered. This is really important to keep the service up and running in a proper and secure manner. With people working from home, the data needs to be checked to see what kind of data is being sent. It has a two-factor authentication mechanism. For example, if a person with a particular domain is using Kiteworks and sends a file to a party outside of his domain, that external party has to go through two-factor authentication. The receiver gets a link that takes them to the setup of a temporary account, which will be valid for three days. The recipient will also receive a customized password separately. Only after all these steps will they be able to access the file. That access is only available to a person with the mail ID to which the file was sent. In addition, admins can see who is sending sensitive content, what that content is, and to whom it is being sent, and can track emails. One week of good training will give a user complete knowledge for using the solution. The system is very easy to use. You just click on "Compose," attach a file, and send it. It's very easy compared to Outlook or Teams. It's quite simple, even for someone logging in for the first time. It is very smooth and easy to send files.

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

"The important features to me are that it is stable, scalable, and the integration between this platform and the other platforms is very good."

"It is used by large enterprises. It has to be scalable and robust for them to use. We have seen that on multiple projects over the years."

"It puts governance in place around the content and processes. Access levels can be set to certain parts of the document based on role level."

"FileNet provides a compact solution for midsized companies."

"It is a user-friendly system and easy to manage for anyone with basic knowledge."

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

"The most valuable feature is access control."

"Gves us the ability to create an end-to-end [document] transaction."

More IBM FileNet pros

"We can see when people are sending things. We can definitely see who is sending to whom. From the administrative logs, we can see who is sending to an outside entity, and those logs are retained for quite a while."

"The top two features are the two-factor authentication, which is pretty good. It's easily understood by the users. And their API is rather robust. We have numerous integrations that work off the API."

"We could see whether the customer with whom we shared a file had downloaded it, which was not available with GitHub."

"The solution removes the limitations with file attachment size that is found with regular email."

"Scalability is impressive."

"The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty."

"I like Kiteworks or Accellion because it's continuously upgraded. I also know that it probably works with a lot of clients."

"The best part of this solution is that we can generate multiple reports about how the data is transferred and about user information or IP."

More Kiteworks pros

Cons

"FileNet needs improvement in pricing as it has become very expensive."

"Programmers have to translate user needs into IBM FileNet, which causes misinterpretations."

"The analytics in FileNet are too complicated and they consume too much infrastructure, memory, and CPU. They're too expensive to work with."

"We would like to have more automation of rollout solutions."

"The new software and trends with the cloud solution is a little slow. I would like them to move toward more cloud-based and microservices rather than a SaaS model. This is where the industry is going and what customers are asking for."

"For end-users there is a lack of administrative features. The interface of basic FileNet is not very good."

"There is no room for improvement in the current version of FileNet, and I have not identified any potential new features or existing problems that require attention."

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

More IBM FileNet cons

"The one feature, which I have also requested directly to Kiteworks, is to have a scheduled upgrade function. Currently, one of my engineers logs in after hours for the upgrade. We're a hospital, and we're 24/7, but the primary users are seven to five. So, we log in the early evening just to push a button to tell it to do the update. It would be nice if that could be very easily scheduled."

"I noticed the Kiteworks login UI is very basic, lacking customization. Allowing more HTML tags to add hyperlinks or user-friendly information on the home page would be very useful."

"Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss."

"Kiteworks could benefit from enhancing the proposal knowledge base section, specifically regarding the type of work involved. Currently, the knowledge base seems insufficiently dedicated to this topic, making it challenging for new users to access the relevant administrative law. Improving the visual aids and providing clearer explanations could alleviate this issue."

"I would like to see immediate releases of fixes because now it takes at least a week. If that time span can be reduced to one day or two days, that would be very helpful for users so that things are sorted and transactions work smoothly."

"It could be more stable. In the next release, it would be better if it was more stable with improved performance."

"There is no offboarding process for end-users in Kiteworks. It's a manual process. There is no automated syncing with LDAP and checking to see if the account is still active. It's a manual process to get people out of here, which isn't the best way."

"It would be nice if Kiteworks could provide a free version of the platform so that it could be used for a certain number of file transfers. We could be charged a fee if we exceeded the number of allotted file transfers."

More Kiteworks cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"When it comes to pricing, IBM needs to make an effort to improve the cost. That's the main issue regarding use of FinalNet in Columbia."

"There are lots of components to the product. Make sure before you invest that you know which components you need."

"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."

"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."

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

"The platform is inexpensive."

"The biggest issue is the cost of the FileNet, because the license cost is very high. If a customer doesn't have good technical guides that are aware of the license calculation, they will pay too much. FileNet's license calculation depends on the processor and number of users. So my advice to a new customer is to be very careful with your calculations before purchasing FileNet."

More IBM FileNet pricing and cost advice

"I believe it's a little costly, but given the faith that we put into it from a security perspective to maintain the integrity of our patient information that is being transferred through this system, that's a small price to pay. So, on the surface, it might look like a lot of money, but depending on the need for security, which is where we feel it shines, it's okay price-wise."

"They changed it midstream. We were being charged a certain flat rate for SFTP traffic. For whatever reason, at the beginning of the year, our pricing changed, and we are now being charged more for using a feature of the product than we were when we first bought it. That has been our experience with billing. It turned out to be more expensive than when we started with it."

"The solution is very expensive because we are buying with Malaysian Ringgit and it's sold in US dollars."

"The license management is changing and confusing. If I could make one change to it, it would be better license management through the API."

"The price of Kiteworks is reasonable."

"It is not really expensive. I mean, to me it's obviously expensive, but it's worth it."

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

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

10%

Insurance Company

Government

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

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?

The product has become more expensive and requires significant investment for enterprise solutions.

What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?

FileNet needs improvement in pricing as it has become very expensive. Also, in comparison to local solutions, the need for coding is a disadvantage.

What is Kiteworks?

Kiteworks is a secured file sharing platform that enables users to collaborate with different parties across a robust offering of secured protected channels. Users have the option of virtual privat...

What do you like most about Kiteworks?

The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty.

What needs improvement with Kiteworks?

I'm not a network expert, however, there must be some room for improvement. Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss. If users receive such notifi...

OpenText Extended ECM vs IBM FileNet

Comparisons

Compared 17% of the time

SharePoint vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

OpenText Documentum vs IBM FileNet

Compared 16% of the time

Hyland OnBase vs IBM FileNet

Compared 8% of the time

Alfresco vs IBM FileNet

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM FileNet Competitors

Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct vs Kiteworks

Compared 44% of the time

SharePoint vs Kiteworks

Compared 11% of the time

MOVEit vs Kiteworks

Compared 9% of the time

FileCloud vs Kiteworks

Compared 9% of the time

GoAnywhere MFT vs Kiteworks

Compared 8% of the time

More Kiteworks Competitors

Product Reports

IBM FileNet

Download IBM FileNet product report

Download Kiteworks product report

Also Known As

No data available

Accellion

Overview

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

Kiteworks empowers organizations to effectively manage risk in every send, share, receive, and save of sensitive content over numerous communications channels: email, file sharing, managed file transfer, APIs, and web forms. The Kiteworks platform unifies, tracks, controls, and secures sensitive content moving within, into, and out of an organization, significantly improving risk management and ensuring regulatory compliance.

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission, National Health Service, Husch Blackwell LLP, NYC Health + Hospitals, Viatris, MITRE Corporation, Chubb, Kraft Heinz, KPMG, Kohler, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Purdue Pharma, AVL

IBM FileNet vs. Kiteworks