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

IBM FileNet vs Nuxeo 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
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Nuxeo
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Digital Asset Management (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of IBM FileNet is 10.0%, up from 10.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nuxeo is 1.8%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

Emad Rizki - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
reviewer2650419 - PeerSpot reviewer
Powerful data model building enables comprehensive document management for government sectors
The learning curve in Nuxeo is not easy, and it requires additional time. It's challenging to onboard new users or new developers. The resources on Hyland are good but lack exercises and use cases to apply by oneself during learning. There is not much practice to apply that knowledge directly on Nuxeo and get further details into the platform.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"​I have found that it scales well."
"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."
"Everybody ties into Active Directory and things like that, but on top of that are the extra layers of security for encryption, so they can meet standards required by PCI and by HIPAA: encryption at rest, encryption in flight, encryption in the database, all together. There are really only three products on the market that know how to do that, and FileNet is one of them."
"It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it."
"IBM FileNet has improved our organization with its single collaboration space."
"The usability is very good. We like the Content Navigator. It's very easy to use the search and retrieve for documents and has a lot of options for the user to download documents or send an email."
"It is very user-friendly for business users. They can create their own searches. They are not dependent on administrators to create searches for them. It is self-service for them."
"The most valuable features of FileNet are its comprehensive ability to store content, to get insights from the content, and to use that content for making decisions routed through workflow."
"Nuxeo is very powerful in terms of building up the data model and the context model."
 

Cons

"I would love it if single sign-on was a lot easier to set up. That's the most difficult part of it."
"It is ability to display legacy content needs improvement."
"There is some confusion with FileNet workflow. It's not really going into the next level. They are probably replacing it with BPM's workflow. So there's an issue of clarity, the vision for going forward."
"It would be nice if they could make it like containers are working in Kubernetes to auto-scale based on demand."
"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."
"Needs a better administration tool."
"The new user interface is not easy to set up, so some improvements along these lines would be good."
"​I would like to see the dashboard be a little bit more robust and a little more user-friendly"
"The learning curve in Nuxeo is not easy, and it requires additional time. It's challenging to onboard new users or new developers."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For small scale industries, they allow different options. They can do open source. It is the complexity of the data security that they should think about before they choose."
"Yearly, we pay for the maintenance, which is $20,000."
"The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance."
"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."
"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."
"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."
"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."
"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."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 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
9%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
18%
Insurance Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
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?
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...
What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?
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.
What needs improvement with Nuxeo?
The learning curve in Nuxeo is not easy, and it requires additional time. It's challenging to onboard new users or new developers. The resources on Hyland are good but lack exercises and use cases ...
What is your primary use case for Nuxeo?
We are mainly using Nuxeo for the government sector, and we are providing document management for those government sectors and universities. So, the main use cases are for government and universities.
What advice do you have for others considering Nuxeo?
The overall rating for Nuxeo is eight out of ten. My advice would be to consider sector and customer requirements carefully when choosing a platform.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Electronic Arts, Jeppesen, U.S. Navy, Orange, GSD&M, Sirona Dental, Skyscanner, Verizon, Unizin, Enernoc, NHS
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FileNet vs. Nuxeo and other solutions. Updated: May 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.