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

Hyland Perceptive Content vs IBM FileNet 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

Hyland Perceptive Content
Average Rating
6.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Document Management Software (13th)
IBM FileNet
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
104
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Content Management (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Content Management solutions, they serve different purposes. Hyland Perceptive Content is designed for Document Management Software and holds a mindshare of 3.0%, down 3.0% compared to last year.
IBM FileNet, on the other hand, focuses on Enterprise Content Management, holds 5.5% mindshare, down 8.2% since last year.
Document Management Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Hyland Perceptive Content3.0%
Alfresco8.5%
Box - Intelligent Content Management6.3%
Other82.2%
Document Management Software
Enterprise Content Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
IBM FileNet5.5%
SharePoint11.8%
OpenText Documentum Content Management6.7%
Other76.0%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

it_user588597 - PeerSpot reviewer
Project Accountant at a construction company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Once a document is scanned, you can neither edit it nor change its location.
I would like it to have more functions, like Bluebeam. It can be improved so that we can edit the file that got scanned into the system. If we scan the document to the wrong place, we can’t change it. As an example, if something was scanned as a reference, but should be an invoice, you cannot change it afterwards. I think it should have more functions that will allow us to edit the file in ImageNow -- such as adding pages, deleting pages. I also think it should have more hot keys (maybe I just don’t know there are) for easier “route forward”, “view next item”, so I don’t have to use my mouse. There is also a question that came up when I was using it recently, why do we need both “properties” and “forms”? If we index the document in Forms, it will take a long time for it to move to another queue and show the info. If we index it in Properties, it will update immediately. My question is why do we need both? Can’t we just put info in Forms and it will work just like Properties? It is time-consuming to put info in both pages. If the invoice is out of balance, maybe there should be a function that stops it being routed forward. If we route it by accident, it takes time for the approver to reject and routed back. If we can catch it in the first place and fix it when there is a warning sign. I know that there will be a red message saying “out of balance”, but it doesn’t always show up. Is it possible for us to “recall” the routed item? Just like recalling an email that you accidentally sent out. Can we make the Notes section working like a sticky note so it shows name/date, shows the most recent message on top. Sticky note is hard to read (too small) and easily get missed as people put it anywhere. We use notes section for every invoice. We often put a lot of messages there and it gets messy.
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

"There are no lost documents, and everyone can see them based on security clearance."
"If you want to go paperless, this is a great product."
"I like the ability to have workflows."
"Customizability that the product gives to make the end user happy."
"In terms of advice, I would say use our partner, Vega, because they've done a really good job."
"For a large-scale solution, like what we needed at my employer, it was great."
"Centralized our business documents."
"Having a centralized repository has become very useful and valuable, and naturally, the audit and compliance requirements have also been fairly well satisfied, thanks to the fact that we have that centralized repository."
"It is really usable. There is a lot of support for it. You have the online components to trawl through the storage. I have a lot of fun with it."
"By using FileNet, especially with bigger contracts, it doesn't take ten days or two weeks to receive and store the documents, because when the documents are emailed it takes under one second and it arrives to customer service, who can then activate the customer's product immediately so the customer doesn't have to wait and the company can earn money for the product sooner."
"It's been a really solid product; I've only had this area for about a year, but it's been a really good product; very few problems."
"The API's extensibility and new user interface are its most valuable features."
 

Cons

"From my understanding, ImageNow licenses are not compatible with laptop computers (at least not with the one that I have). Therefore, if I have a PDF on my screen, in order to get it into ImageNow, I have to either email it to someone with a license, who can print directly to ImageNow, or print it out and have someone at a scanning station, scan it in and then link it to a student’s record."
"It will stop working if you are in the system for too long."
"Too many companies/products have been purchased by Perceptive over the past few years with what feels like little development on currently owned products."
"Bar Code OCR ICR."
"I think some of the technical pieces, when implementing it ourselves, were something of a roadblock until we discovered the Concierge. Those are some things they have to work on."
"We use a customized viewer, because ICN doesn't have a couple of features we need around security, restricting content; who can see what content within the repository."
"There is some confusion with FileNet workflow. It's not really going into the next level. They are probably replacing it with BPM's workflow. So there's an issue of clarity, the vision for going forward."
"The complexity of installation can also be improved. They should re-imagine the way that they install products."
"The initial setup is complex. It is complex because there are several pieces of software that have to be installed in the right order to make it work alright."
"Currently, our primary ERP system is SAP S/4HANA. Despite this, we have encountered difficulties integrating the solution with it, which remains an unresolved challenge for our team."
"From an improvement perspective, one of the things we often have challenges with is, within the FileNet product, changing properties or just general configurations within the product to support a business."
"Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution saves time and money. It helps us to be able to accomplish the goals of our business, as opposed to being tangled in the weeds of what we could do."
"Talking about the cost is difficult because IBM has offers that combine different products, and each of these offers has different types of licensing. IBM also has a policy that the actual price for a given customer may be very different from the stated book price. It's hard to say whether it's expensive or not."
"The tool is expensive, and I rate its pricing a ten out of ten."
"FileNet is not cheap, but you absolutely get what you pay for. ​"
"For the medium scale or large scale, I would recommend FileNet. FileNet is free of licensing expenses, thus good for the money. It is not expensive, but worth for the money, especially for medium scale and large scale industries."
"For small scale industries, they allow different options. They can do open source. It is the complexity of the data security that they should think about before they choose."
"The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance."
"It is still a leading ECM solution provider, however the cost to implement and maintain are higher than other solutions."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Document Management Software solutions are best for your needs.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Healthcare Company
18%
Manufacturing Company
11%
University
9%
Construction Company
7%
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...
 

Also Known As

ImageNow
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Find out what your peers are saying about Hyland, Conga, Box and others in Document Management Software. Updated: August 2026.
913,683 professionals have used our research since 2012.