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

IBM FileNet vs OpenText Content Manager vs SharePoint 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
3.8
IBM FileNet boosts productivity and efficiency, reduces costs, and enhances document management, yielding significant financial gains and competitive advantage.
Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Content Manager improves efficiency and security, though requires more support and integration compared to modern solutions.
Sentiment score
5.9
SharePoint reduces costs by improving efficiency and document management, offering better control and collaboration with initial training recommended.
There is a significant ROI from IBM FileNet because before its introduction, the company needed to do all the work manually.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.8
IBM FileNet's support is praised for responsiveness and partnerships, despite occasional delays and challenges like database implementation issues.
Sentiment score
5.6
OpenText Content Manager support varies; users praise premium help but note deficiencies and complexity, especially after third-party involvement.
Sentiment score
5.3
SharePoint support quality varies; some rely on external teams for better service due to complications and infrastructure differences.
People come from all over the world, and they have specialists at the other end of the world to help if needed.
IBM has a different division that provides consultation to end users, and most customers utilize consultation from IBM, which costs approximately $100k USD to $200k USD.
The consulting experts that IBM provides sometimes do not understand the tool very well.
There is a lack of detailed and timely responses, and support is not always transparent with the solutions.
The quality of Microsoft's technical support is very high.
It's also difficult sometimes to get the right information because we speak at first to a generalist and they have to go to a specialist.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
IBM FileNet excels in scalability and adaptability, supporting extensive users and data, suitable for multinational enterprises with diverse needs.
Sentiment score
7.1
OpenText Content Manager is scalable but challenges arise with large deployments, suggesting planning and using cloud platforms for enhancement.
Sentiment score
6.7
SharePoint is highly scalable and adaptable, supporting various user scales; proper setup and planning mitigate storage challenges.
The bigger products like IBM FileNet can handle billions of documents and thousands of users.
With Kubernetes, we can simply add instances of the worker, CPU, or memory without needing deployment.
We have about 80 transactional systems connected to IBM FileNet.
Making it easy to scale from a load-balancing and infrastructure perspective.
SharePoint is massively scalable and I would rate it as 8.5 out of ten.
SharePoint allows multiple teams to work at the same time, making it adaptable for large data volumes.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
IBM FileNet is valued for its reliable performance and stability, with improvements noted in recent upgrades and infrastructure configurations.
Sentiment score
6.2
OpenText Content Manager's stability is generally rated high, but integration and scalability issues affect some users' experiences.
Sentiment score
7.5
SharePoint is generally stable and reliable, though users may encounter performance issues and support challenges with larger data volumes.
FileNet was restricted to DB2's enterprise edition instead of the standard edition, causing complications.
In terms of stability, we haven't experienced any big technical issues or downtime with IBM FileNet.
The stability of SharePoint is high; it is quite stable and resilient.
Everything runs smoothly, and I have no problems with its stability.
SharePoint is a stable product.
 

Room For Improvement

IBM FileNet needs enhanced hybrid cloud support, integration, automation, analytics, mobile experience, simplifying APIs, and reducing costs.
OpenText Content Manager needs enhancements in integration, usability, search, security, installation, pricing, and service responsiveness for better user experience.
SharePoint users seek improved usability, document management, customization, and training, facing challenges with setup, updates, and licensing.
Ease of use with IBM FileNet is a disadvantage of this tool. It is complex and hard to use.
The response time and resolution of issues by technical support need improvement.
From the beginning, we cannot use a REST API; we have to use the IBM FileNet native API, which is quite outdated.
Microsoft forces users to upgrade their license to access proper auditing information, which is essential and should be included in any license.
The rights management aspect can be particularly challenging, which may affect the overall user-friendliness of the product.
Expansion of scalability is needed, specifically the threshold limits for site items should be increased beyond the current 5,000 items.
 

Setup Cost

IBM FileNet is costly, but often valued by medium to large enterprises, with complex licensing and significant setup expenses.
OpenText Content Manager's licensing is complex and expensive, but negotiation and customization are possible despite high ongoing costs.
SharePoint pricing varies by business needs, with cloud options for small businesses and complex licensing for larger enterprises.
The product has become more expensive and requires significant investment for enterprise solutions.
The price is high, with yearly subscriptions increasing day by day.
FileNet and similar enterprise-level tools require substantial costs, starting in the millions.
Unlike Drupal, all necessary applications are included in the Microsoft license, making it cost-effective.
Microsoft offers bundled pricing for Office, SharePoint, and Exchange, making it cost-effective.
Enterprise licensing is generally cost-effective compared to individual purchases.
 

Valuable Features

IBM FileNet provides scalability, robust document management, and seamless integration with extensive automation, governance, and workflow tools for efficient operations.
OpenText Content Manager offers efficient document management with strong search, customization, integration, security, and large-scale enterprise support.
SharePoint boosts productivity with collaboration, document management, Office integration, and automation, benefiting large enterprises through adaptability and powerful features.
There is a significant ROI from IBM FileNet because before its introduction, the company needed to do all the work manually.
The main features we find impactful are the workflow and document management along with FileNet file stores.
At this level, companies don't buy a ready-made solution.
Additionally, SharePoint acts as a version control system, allowing easy recovery of past document versions.
Its rights management capabilities and ability to restrict access to certain people are also very useful.
The most valuable feature of SharePoint is the ability to collaborate on documents without having multiple versions.
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of IBM FileNet is 8.4%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 5.0%, up from 3.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SharePoint is 15.1%, down from 19.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
SharePoint15.1%
IBM FileNet8.4%
OpenText Content Manager5.0%
Other71.5%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

RTHUR BRUNO - PeerSpot reviewer
Has provided robust content management but requires simplification in configuration and usability
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 primarily use it to store content. We are now trying to use all of the functionalities of IBM FileNet, but we have not yet utilized the full capacity of the system. We are trying to reduce redundancy with IBM FileNet by enhancing our business rules. However, we still have significant redundancy. IBM FileNet can help us reduce redundancy, but we need to understand the tool and use all the functionalities to accomplish this. Ease of use with IBM FileNet is a disadvantage of this tool. It is complex and hard to use. When we try to set up IBM FileNet, we have many questions. We do not understand what we need to do in IBM FileNet. There are many configurations we must make but do not know how to implement. While IBM FileNet is very reliable, it is very difficult to set up. When reading the documentation about IBM FileNet, it appears to be very reliable and secure, but setting up configurations, access rules, authorization, and authentication seems to be very challenging.
Maurice Riverso - PeerSpot reviewer
Our our official repository and it has disposal management and retention management
The security architecture is the only problem as it's a little bit complex and too torturous at times. So it could be improved a little bit, but it is regarded as a very good system in Australia. It's probably overly subscribed. Also, what's missing is what people would like, which is basically online collaboration. That's a problem. But it has so many other things to offer that SharePoint, I'm sure, will not have. So, that will be an interesting issue to come up. It's not very good at providing stable and robust add-ins to Microsoft. That's a bit of a problem with Content Manager. They're kind of very volatile. So, that's been definitely something that could be improved.
Madhur D'silva - PeerSpot reviewer
Collaborative work benefits while user-friendliness challenges persist
The most valuable feature of SharePoint is its user interface, which is very easy to use. I do not have to be very technical to use it. Its rights management capabilities and ability to restrict access to certain people are also very useful. Furthermore, I can access SharePoint from any device, whether it is a phone or laptop, which is very convenient.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
867,826 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Comparison Review

it_user8925 - PeerSpot reviewer
Aug 23, 2013
Jive vs Sharepoint vs Drupal Commons
At Mediacurrent we often get requests to compare Drupal to other platforms used for intranet sites and social business platforms (like https://dev.twitter.com/ for example). This is often referred to as “Social Business Software”, which has grown in popularity in recent years. I decided to do a…
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
9%
Government
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise74
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business79
Midsize Enterprise37
Large Enterprise80
 

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 so...
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; w...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Content Manager?
An advantage is integration with your IP directory.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is a disadvantage as it is very expensive, especially in this market.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive. Support and services need to be more user-friendly. The support has been...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SharePoint?
As SharePoint is part of the Microsoft 365 suite, the pricing is acceptable.
What needs improvement with SharePoint?
Not with SharePoint specifically, but overall with the software or tools from Microsoft, I think there are areas that...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Micro Focus Content Manager, HPE Records Manager, HPE Content Manager
SharePoint 2007, SharePoint 2010
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Missouri State Courts
Toyota, Aeroports de Paris, ASBBank Ltd., Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals, CambridgeshireConstabulary, D&M Group, NPL Construction Company, and The Regional Municipality of Niagara.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, IBM and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: September 2025.
867,826 professionals have used our research since 2012.