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

OpenText Content Manager vs OpenText Information Archive comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 19, 2025

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

OpenText Content Manager
Ranking in File Archiving
4th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Content Management (6th), Document Management Software (1st)
OpenText Information Archive
Ranking in File Archiving
5th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.5
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the File Archiving category, the mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 4.5%, up from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Information Archive is 5.1%, down from 7.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
File Archiving
 

Featured Reviews

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.
reviewer1973199 - PeerSpot reviewer
A solution that helps us sunset applications and manages data
It scales very well. We haven't completed any massive implementations, but we've never run into any scalability issues with the implementations we have. The number of users varies drastically and depends on what data is archived. For example, the users will be HR if HR data is archived. Or, if you're archiving financial system data or line of business applications, the users will be different. It's not licensed per user but on the amount of content in the system. So you can have as many users as you want. Maintenance only requires a fraction of the resources. It generally doesn't take up full-time resources to manage and administer. It's low-key once the system is in place and set up.

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 features of OpenText Content Manager are its stability, reliability, security, and workflow engine."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"For a records management system, Content Manager is a really good system."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"The tool's implementation has made life easier for customers. It is sold by SAP. The integration between SAP and the solution is good, making it easy to access the documents. It is widely recognized as a market leader in enterprise document management."
"It has a robust search but has often been difficult for people to learn."
"It has a strong XML engine for reading data and making it indexed and searchable."
 

Cons

"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"It's not very good at providing stable and robust add-ins to Microsoft."
"Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"Due to very limited use in the industry, vendor and contract support are hard to find."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"It requires a decent amount of XL mapping."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product price an eight or nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The solution is expensive."
"The fees incurred are for the licensing and maintenance."
"The solution's licensing cost depends on the customer domain. Though its costs are high, the product is worth the money. You have to pay a one-time cost and support costs."
"I would suggest that you do a thorough evaluation of all competing products and look for support for these products in your local area."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File Archiving solutions are best for your needs.
862,514 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
18%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Pharma/Biotech Company
10%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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 slow, and there is room for improvement. Additionally, they could improve build...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Content Manager, HPE Records Manager, HPE Content Manager
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Missouri State Courts
BMO Harris Bank, Pacific Life Insurance Company, China CITIC Bank International Limited, Techint Group, Agility, Lahey Health
Find out what your peers are saying about Commvault, Veritas, Microsoft and others in File Archiving. Updated: July 2025.
862,514 professionals have used our research since 2012.