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

Alfresco vs Laserfiche 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

Alfresco
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
7th
Ranking in Document Management Software
1st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Laserfiche
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
22nd
Ranking in Document Management Software
9th
Average Rating
10.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of Alfresco is 8.0%, up from 7.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Laserfiche is 2.0%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Alfresco8.0%
Laserfiche2.0%
Other90.0%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

JM
Country Head Spain at Apiux
Maintaining document integrity with persistent linking and customizable workflows
Currently, documents in Alfresco are stored on a file server, which, while good for performance, is a security risk. Clients, especially large enterprises such as banks, are concerned about document security if someone breaches the server. It would be beneficial if Alfresco offers different options for document storage, such as databases or cloud solutions. Also, it would be helpful if Alfresco's viewer could be easily embedded in other systems, as its integration is currently complex.
CB
Consultant DMS/ECM at NSI IT Software & Services (Cegeka Group)
A powerful solution that offers BPM and automation to assist with our digital transformation
We use this solution for DMS, ECM, scan and imaging, plus workflows and forms solutions spread over the entire company This is a very complete and powerful solution. No code: We can address all of the features and functionalities with computer-minded people without having to call the IT Dept or…

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 flexibility of the searching elements of the metadata."
"I like the ease of use, sections, and calendar."
"Alfresco's technical support is very fast and professional."
"Document repository."
"The product allows engineering teams and developers to introduce new things in a seamless and easy way."
"The digitalization of workflow, forms, operations, and business processes is also significant."
"The most valuable features of Alfresco include its integration with the scanning solution, the ability to search, and the capability to store and index to capture metadata."
"You can meet your users' expected features without having Alfresco's involvement."
"This is a very complete and powerful solution."
 

Cons

"I would like them to consider document capture functionality."
"Currently, documents in Alfresco are stored on a file server, which, while good for performance, is a security risk."
"Metadata, auto class, disposition log, and legal hold."
"Alfresco could improve workflow digitalization and enhance artificial intelligence capabilities."
"The configuration of Alfresco is a big challenge."
"If you don't have proper governance, things can go wrong. You have to make rules, such as one folder should not have more than 5,000 subfolders or children."
"The setup process for Alfresco was complex."
"Alfresco has a very steep learning curve, and unfortunately, during the learning process, it's very easy to make errors, which often are unforgiving."
"We would like to see more features for RPA and AI."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is cheaper compared to head-to-head competitors."
"The license for Alfresco is expensive - not the maximum, but close. There are also extra costs once you start building integrations, as implementation seems to be very costly."
"If you buy Alfresco through a partner, there is usually a OEM licensing option."
"There are costs for any upgrade or additional functions."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
16%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Government
20%
University
9%
Retailer
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Alfresco?
The pricing of Alfresco starts at $100,000, which can be expensive for small projects. There is often a transition from the community version to the licensed version, which incurs migration costs. ...
What needs improvement with Alfresco?
Currently, the challenge is the general availability to users. Initially, they had poor documentation, but over the years, their documentation has highly improved. Initially, we had challenges find...
What is your primary use case for Alfresco?
This is mainly for unstructured document management systems with workflow and data classification.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Over 1,300 companies from 180 different countries. Including EuroStar, Saks Fifth Avenue, NASA Langley Research Center, and KLM.
D.L. Evans, College of the Desert, Community Action, Tompkins County, Hanson McClain, Olmsted County, Old Line Bank, Steinhafels, CIRCOR Pibiviesse
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, IBM, OpenText and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: January 2026.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.