Saperion vs Siav Archiflow comparison

Hyland and Siav are both solutions in the Enterprise Content Management category. Hyland is ranked #28, while Siav is ranked #37. Hyland holds a 1.0% mindshare in ECM, compared to Siav’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of Hyland users are willing to recommend the solution.

Saperion

Read 1 Saperion review

508 Views
488 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

Siav Archiflow

Read 1 Siav Archiflow review

359 Views
298 Comparison Views

0% willing to recommend

Saperion

Siav Archiflow

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Saperion and Siav Archiflow based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Hyland, IBM and others in Enterprise Content Management.

To learn more, read our detailed Enterprise Content Management Report (Updated: April 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

April 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 886,906 peers since 2012

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

Saperion

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

28th

Average Rating

3.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Siav Archiflow

Ranking in Enterprise Content Management

37th

Average Rating

6.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Saperion is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Siav Archiflow is 0.7%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Enterprise Content Management Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Saperion	1.0%
Siav Archiflow	0.7%
Other	98.3%

Enterprise Content Management

Featured Reviews

it_user592605

Software Engineer at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees

I would like to see improvements in the web client and the workflow engine.

I think that the biggest area for improvement is for their core component, the Java Core Server (JCS). In addition, there could be improvement in the following areas: * Saperion web client: Does not support many rich-client features and is inconsistent between thin and thick clients * The VBA macro API was very poor * No real toolset provided * No debugging options * Workflow engine * No official and supported procedure of deploying/moving a solution between stages, which was officially stated by the vendor

Read full review

it_user109623

IT Consultant at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees

Easy to store information and maintan workflow but we use QlikView for reporting because built in reporting is poor.

Workflow Reorganized the workflow for purchase invoice. My customer uses version 6, I haven't seen the new one. If it hasn't yet been upgraded in the new version, I feel that the interface can be improved to be more windows like. Since 2008 We didn't have any deployment issues. While version 5…

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product allowed organizations to move and accelerate their paper-based business flows into electronic ones."

"We didn't experience any issues with the initial setup, it was easy."

Cons

"Do not follow this path. This is a very tough platform to implement anything apart from some simple-case scenarios."

"Customer Service: 5/10. The supplier is slow to answer but now it's better with a self employed consultant."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

886,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Comparisons

Hyland OnBase vs Saperion

Compared 48% of the time

SharePoint vs Saperion

Compared 33% of the time

OpenText Documentum Content Management vs Saperion

Compared 19% of the time

More Saperion Competitors

SharePoint vs Siav Archiflow

Compared 45% of the time

Alfresco vs Siav Archiflow

Compared 30% of the time

Hyland Perceptive Content vs Siav Archiflow

Compared 25% of the time

More Siav Archiflow Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

April 2026

Download Saperion product report

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

April 2026

Download Siav Archiflow product report

Also Known As

Hyland Saperion, Hyland Saperion ECM, Saperion ECM

Archiflow

Overview

Saperion ECM helps you improve efficiency and fulfill compliance requirements — even when managing information trapped in unstructured documents such as invoices and emails. Saperion automates document capture, processing, management and archiving, and allows immediate content retrieval throughout the enterprise. It supports legal, operational and regulatory requirements. Security permissions ensure that only authorized users access the information they need. Saperion enables seamless application integrations to help you adapt to ever-changing business needs.

Hyland

Archiflow is a technology platform for enterprise content management, available in-house or in the cloud, allowing you to manage documents and automate business processes.

Siav

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Sinelec, Vimea, JOS, Silenea, Ravenia, Adecco, Euronics, Zeis, Unogas, Kerry, Suez, MSC Crociers

Buyer's Guide

Enterprise Content Management

April 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Hyland, IBM and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: April 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

886,906 professionals have used our research since 2012.

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.