No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Digital Safe vs OpenText Content Manager comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

Digital Safe
Ranking in File Archiving
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText Content Manager
Ranking in File Archiving
3rd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Content Management (13th), Document Management Software (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the File Archiving category, the mindshare of Digital Safe is 5.5%, up from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 7.2%, up from 4.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
File Archiving Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Content Manager7.2%
Digital Safe5.5%
Other87.3%
File Archiving
 

Featured Reviews

it_user948 - PeerSpot reviewer
digital strategist at SMD Services
Solid product, functionally rich, but complex.
The message archiving tool is very powerful and can handle many search / flagging scenarios, as well as numerous message types (SMS, E-mail, bloomberg, etc). With flexibility comes complexity. The solution is very complex and requires significant configuration. If hosting…
Maurice Riverso - PeerSpot reviewer
Records Management Officer at ANZPAA
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The message archiving tool is very powerful and can handle many search / flagging scenarios, as well as numerous message types (SMS, E-mail, Bloomberg, etc)."
"We like how the solution allows us to have retention of records and workflows, as well as its fire plan."
"The product is valuable generally due to its wide use and acceptance in the public sector in my region."
"Eliminated the need for paper records."
"My advice to others is that they cannot go wrong with the solution."
"Customer Service: We appreciate HPE's team of resources, who assist us as issues arise."
"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."
"I did not face issues with the product's scalability...The solution's technical support is good."
"Sharing of documents, reduction of duplication, and the ability to manage retention, disposition and overall records management have been significant benefits for our organization."
 

Cons

"With flexibility comes complexity. The solution is very complex and requires significant configuration."
"Functionality gets removed as new versions are released."
"Many projects I've worked on encounter issues in production relating to load balancing and throttling where systems cannot cope with the volumes and capacity of transactional processing."
"Technical support is very frustrating. It is difficult to get a good response from HPE and even more difficult to find anyone that can really help us with the product."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive."
"This system eats up a lot of staff time for support, administration, and use."
"This web client requires more refinement to be viable as a desktop client replacement."
"The system is difficult to navigate and understand the full scope of functionality available for end users to appreciate the value."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I would suggest that you do a thorough evaluation of all competing products and look for support for these products in your local area."
"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."
"The fees incurred are for the licensing and maintenance."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which File Archiving solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise6
Large Enterprise8
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Digital Safe, Autonomy Zantaz, HPE Autonomy Zantaz, HPE Digital Safe
Micro Focus Content Manager, HPE Records Manager, HPE Content Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

EDF, Morgan Stanley, RateCity, Missouri State Courts
Missouri State Courts
Find out what your peers are saying about Veritas, OpenText, Quest Software and others in File Archiving. Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.