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

DocuShare vs IBM FileNet comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 4, 2024

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

DocuShare
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
28th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
IBM FileNet
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
104
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of DocuShare is 1.2%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM FileNet is 5.5%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM FileNet5.5%
DocuShare1.2%
Other93.3%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

RW
Software Analyst at Altron
The new releases incorporate significant advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and language processing capabilities
Version control interface is very good. The new releases of DocuShare incorporate significant advancements in artificial intelligence, machine learning, and language processing capabilities. For instance, when you upload a document into DocuShare, you no longer need to set up templates to identify and extract important fields. The system automatically reads the document and identifies key information. For example, in a contract document between two entities, it can recognize the contract start date, end date, reference number, and other relevant details without manual intervention. This automated process streamlines document management. You should know your requirements and understand your environment, as well as the goals you want to achieve. Try out the demo first to see if it fits your needs and objectives before making a decision. Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
Shankar-Kambhampaty - PeerSpot reviewer
Consulting CTO at a tech consulting company with 1-10 employees
Business workflows have been automated and document processes are streamlined at large scale
I believe IBM FileNet could be improved or enhanced in the future, specifically the user interface development support, which, despite all the improvements, still feels from the 2010s or 2000s. The current state of the user interface development support and the ability to customize it leaves much to be desired. The backend engine, process engine, and object engine are fantastic. However, the user interface, which is required to provide an impressive experience to the user, is difficult to build. IBM will need to do something about this area. Over time, IBM has made improvements with enhancements through CP4BA and other tools, with which user interfaces can be built. But there is much more is needed. The initial setup process for IBM FileNet requires specialists. IBM FileNet is not a click-click-click deploy kind of product. It has several components that need to be installed in different versions and in a particular order. Additionally, IBM Cloud does not provide a proper experience. The problem is I cannot use IBM Cloud easily. I cannot even get a membership easily. With AWS, I just use my credit card, sign up, and I am done. With IBM Cloud, that is not how it is. They go through all validation processes, and it is a nightmare at times. There are problems around IBM FileNet, not exactly with IBM FileNet itself, but the point is that it is not a click-click-click deploy either on the cloud or on-premise. It requires specialists, and there is a big learning curve toward deploying and managing the whole infrastructure as well as the software. I communicate with the technical support of IBM frequently. I have communicated several times, and frankly, there is much to be desired on that side. When you raise a ticket, it takes 24 to 48 hours for them to respond. We live in a time where business moves at the speed of light. Twenty-four hours is a very long time. You need to be able to get technical support instantaneously. It is not like the more contemporary support models where you get turnaround in minutes, not days.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most of our customers experienced a stellar improvement in productivity, as documents are now centralized and user access levels are deployed to prevent users from opening and downloading confidential information."
"The software development kit can be customized."
"For one implementation, the full-text indexing of PDF documents and associated search were the most valuable features."
"Features such as the search engine, workflows and customization are valuable to us."
"The most valuable feature is access control."
"The solution has increased productivity; it has reduced operating costs and saved us time, turning processes that used to take weeks into tasks that are now completed within days."
"The Workflow feature is the most valuable feature of FileNet, and then the content management and storage."
"The key way that this product has improved the way that that our business functions is by its stability. Its ability to remain up despite other pressures, its consistency, and lack of downtime are really the greatest things that it brings."
"It's very robust; we have been using it for the last 15 years and we've never had any opinion to change it or not use it, and so far, we have been very happy with it."
"Document security."
"FileNet has many features which support our clients' compliance and governance requirements."
"The key feature for us is that it keeps our content store small. That helps our DBAs when they have to do the backups of our audit system, or of the content store."
 

Cons

"Technical Support is nonexistent if your licenses have gone beyond the one-year support program."
"The user interface could be improved."
"Reports and integration with third-party applications can be improved."
"I still think it's kind of expensive. I didn't notice that the cloud offerings were going to be any cheaper."
"However, with the way that everything works, Datacap and FileNet must stay properly maintained, otherwise there are a lot of issues which might happen."
"We would like to see, in FileNet, the ability to manage video and audio.​"
"There are only a few products large enterprises can choose from, and it doesn't really matter which one as it often depends on the consultants and the team implementing the solution."
"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."
"I did hear that maybe there are some errors in relationship to another product that they offer, like SmartLock."
"It would be nice if they could make it like containers are working in Kubernetes to auto-scale based on demand."
"There is some confusion with FileNet workflow."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed."
"The tool is expensive, and I rate its pricing a ten out of ten."
"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."
"Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage."
"The platform is inexpensive."
"FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too."
"When it comes to pricing, IBM needs to make an effort to improve the cost. That's the main issue regarding use of FinalNet in Columbia."
"1. It will be more expensive than estimated to setup. 2. You will need to double the staff while you are running the old system and installing the new system. 3. Depending on the number of documents to be migrated, make sure you understand the potentially massive amount of time and effort required to migrate the existing content to the new platform."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Construction Company
7%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business32
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise74
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FileNet?
The pricing and licensing of IBM FileNet is high. We are living in a world where the minimal license from IBM costs anywhere from seventy-five thousand to one hundred thousand US dollars, depending...
What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?
I believe IBM FileNet could be improved or enhanced in the future, specifically the user interface development support, which, despite all the improvements, still feels from the 2010s or 2000s. The...
What is your primary use case for IBM FileNet?
My usual use cases for IBM FileNet involve three primary areas. The first is document management. For instance, if you have an insurance application, you can store all the documents required to pro...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Lincoln Public Schools, West Orange School District, Tulane University, Niagara Catholic School District, Arig, Co-operative Financial Services, Mizuho Capital Markets Corporation, Volksbank Romania and Iron Mountain, Hammersmith Hospital, Holman Insurance Brokers Ltd., Kaiser Permanente, Convergys Inc., Honeywell, Universal Pictures, McGraw Hill Construction Information Group
Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Find out what your peers are saying about DocuShare vs. IBM FileNet and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.