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

IBM FileNet vs M-Files comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
105
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Content Management (2nd)
M-Files
Average Rating
9.0
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Document Management Software (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Content Management solutions, they serve different purposes. IBM FileNet is designed for Enterprise Content Management and holds a mindshare of 6.2%, down 10.2% compared to last year.
M-Files, on the other hand, focuses on Document Management Software, holds 4.9% mindshare, down 8.0% since last year.
Enterprise Content Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM FileNet6.2%
SharePoint11.3%
OpenText Content Management8.0%
Other74.5%
Enterprise Content Management
Document Management Software Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
M-Files4.9%
Alfresco11.8%
OpenText Content Manager8.2%
Other75.1%
Document Management Software
 

Featured Reviews

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.
LN
Director of IT at JH Kelly
Good workflows, and it is easy to use with a dashboard that improves contract visibility
My advice for anybody who is looking into implementing this product is to do a pilot first. After you do your research, do an actual pilot before you commit because everyone has nuances and you might find out that it is not what you want, or that it doesn't really do what you think it's going to do. It is not the simplest product to use but because of the robustness of its feature set in the ability with the workflows, and the APIs, to do just about anything you can imagine with it, that's very valuable. I wish it was a little easier to use because we have to spend more time than I'd like with new users, teaching them how it works. We try to hide all that from them but the setup time to get everything the way we wanted was probably two months. That is two months in one resource working on it half time a week, but it just took a lot of work to get the metadata set up, to get the workflows set up, and to get all the documents added to the repository. Now we've got versioning and we know where everything's at, the dashboard is great, but don't assume when they tell you that you'll be up and running in two weeks, that that is the truth. It takes much longer than you think. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The features that I have found most valuable include the Data Capture and Case Manager features."
"IBM FileNet supports our document management and compliance processes."
"The most valuable feature is the way in which it enables clients and customers to quickly access the content and information that they use for everyday functions."
"FileNet is very user-friendly... We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them."
"It is a faster, robust solution. The platform compatibility is very good."
"In terms of stability, we haven't experienced any big technical issues or downtime with IBM FileNet, which is a difference compared to smaller products."
"​Streamlined our business processes."
"IBM FileNet is a very robust system with many functionalities for content management."
"Using M-Files means anybody on the executive team to go in and immediately look at a dashboard and know the status of a contract."
 

Cons

"​I would rate the technical support as medium. I do not like the login process. It is not great."
"​I would like to see the dashboard be a little bit more robust and a little more user-friendly"
"I would like to see it able to capture NLP in an advanced search. It would also be good if it could capture images and segregate them in categories within a span of seconds."
"It would be nice if they could make it like containers are working in Kubernetes to auto-scale based on demand."
"IBM has a lot of documentation but the kind of information in a lot of the documents can be confusing to our clients. It would be easier if they used video tutorials. Right now, the information is too hard to understand, and there is a lot of it. If they used videos I think FinalNet would be easy to use for an end-user."
"During the initial setup, all the details and different technical things that we were trying to figure out became complex."
"I'd like to see more cognitive. That's obviously where all of our world is going. I think if we can have more of those types of features and functions as a core, out of the box, that would be very helpful for us and our space."
"Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document."
"The integration with other products needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Yearly, we pay for the maintenance, which is $20,000."
"FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too."
"My customers have seen ROI. There have been productivity gains, time savings gains, and things that they have been doing much more efficiently in a more modern way than they were before."
"IBM FileNet is an expensive solution."
"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."
"Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage."
"The platform is inexpensive."
"​There are lots of components to the product. Make sure before you invest that you know which components you need.​​"
"They have an Optical Character Scanning module but we didn't buy it because it's ridiculously expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Marketing Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
Construction Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise13
Large Enterprise74
No data available
 

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 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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Crowe UK, Stearns Bank, Head Energy, OMV, TK Elevator
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, IBM, OpenText and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: February 2026.
882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.