Kiteworks vs Oracle Content Management comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Kiteworks Logo
221 views|153 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Oracle Logo
901 views|785 comparisons
100% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Kiteworks and Oracle Content Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Content Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
To learn more, read our detailed Kiteworks vs. Oracle Content Management Report (Updated: May 2024).
771,170 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"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.""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 solution removes the limitations with file attachment size that is found with regular email.""I like Kiteworks or Accellion because it's continuously upgraded. I also know that it probably works with a lot of clients.""The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files.""We could see whether the customer with whom we shared a file had downloaded it, which was not available with GitHub.""The most valuable feature is the ability to allow end-users to manage their own information and data with minimal administration. That's the best feature from my perspective.""The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty."

More Kiteworks Pros →

"It's a comprehensive solution for managing documents within our organization's management framework."

More Oracle Content Management Pros →

Cons
"It could be more stable. In the next release, it would be better if it was more stable with improved performance.""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.""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.""File location could be improved.""There are always issues when there are bugs or upgrades. The challenge with upgrading is getting more storage from the customer. Every time we have a new version, it requires additional storage. This means that the customer would need to procure more storage for their server, which they don't like because it means additional cost to them. So, I think my request would be that the version upgrades don't require any significant storage requirement.""We have experienced a few hiccups and bugs when using the admin console and from a user perspective.""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.""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 →

"Oracle Content Management poses complexities in initial implementation and configuration."

More Oracle Content Management Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "It is not really expensive. I mean, to me it's obviously expensive, but it's worth it."
  • "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 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."
  • "The solution is very expensive because we are buying with Malaysian Ringgit and it's sold in US dollars."
  • More Kiteworks Pricing and Cost Advice →

    Information Not Available
    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
    771,170 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Top Answer: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 private… more »
    Top Answer:The benefits that Kiteworks has provided to its customers in terms of data sovereignty.
    Top Answer:There is room for improvement in terms of support. My team always faces challenges in accessing fast resolution for the issues.
    Top Answer:It's a comprehensive solution for managing documents within our organization's management framework.
    Top Answer:Oracle Content Management poses complexities in initial implementation and configuration.
    Top Answer:We use Content Management to supervise and control document access within our management structure. This involves establishing measures to efficiently manage and govern the content. Our approach… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    221
    Comparisons
    153
    Reviews
    10
    Average Words per Review
    871
    Rating
    8.8
    Views
    901
    Comparisons
    785
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    627
    Rating
    9.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Accellion
    Oracle Document and Process Cloud, Oracle Content and Experience Cloud
    Learn More
    Overview

    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.

    Oracle Content and Experience Cloud is a cloud-based content hub to drive omni-channel content management and accelerate experience delivery.

    Sample Customers
    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
    TekStream Solutions LLC, NetCompany, AFG, Pride Mobility, TEAM Informatics Pty Ltd., Sutton Tools, Mythics, Inc., DVLA
    Top Industries
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Government14%
    Financial Services Firm12%
    Computer Software Company8%
    Manufacturing Company7%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm14%
    Government14%
    Computer Software Company12%
    Educational Organization8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business23%
    Large Enterprise77%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise66%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business20%
    Midsize Enterprise19%
    Large Enterprise61%
    Buyer's Guide
    Kiteworks vs. Oracle Content Management
    May 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Kiteworks vs. Oracle Content Management and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
    771,170 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Kiteworks is ranked 5th in Enterprise Content Management with 12 reviews while Oracle Content Management is ranked 11th in Enterprise Content Management with 2 reviews. Kiteworks is rated 8.8, while Oracle Content Management is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Kiteworks writes "A unified, secure way to share sensitive content, with no file size limitations". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Content Management writes "Streamlines document management and enhances collaboration through its robust features and intuitive interface". Kiteworks is most compared with Sterling Commerce Connect:Direct, MOVEit, Fortra's GoAnywhere MFT, SharePoint and Cisco Secure Email Threat Defense, whereas Oracle Content Management is most compared with Oracle WebCenter, SharePoint, Adobe Experience Manager, Microsoft OneDrive and Alfresco. See our Kiteworks vs. Oracle Content Management 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.