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

IBM FileNet vs Oracle WebCenter comparison

 

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

IBM FileNet
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
102
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Oracle WebCenter
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
17th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
Customer Experience Management (35th), Web Content Management (11th), Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) (6th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of IBM FileNet is 9.1%, down from 10.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle WebCenter is 1.9%, down from 2.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
IBM FileNet9.1%
Oracle WebCenter1.9%
Other89.0%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

Emad Rizki - PeerSpot reviewer
Facilitates seamless integration for large enterprises with strong deployment capabilities
FileNet was scalable and could be implemented into big multinational organizations. However, it has become very expensive recently. Compared to low-code solutions such as Appian and outsystems, FileNet has gaps, mainly because it requires coding, which is not preferred by clients due to pricing concerns in Pakistan. We transitioned clients to cloud solutions, although FileNet has been strongly integrated with on-prem deployments.
Mehdi Hasankhan - PeerSpot reviewer
Gives me easy access, connection and compatibility with all of the Oracle products
WebCenter content access has a lot of options and flexibility. At this time, I only see one problem: in the sub-content and channels surrounding Windows 10. It only functions with Windows 7 and Windows 8. All of the operating systems in my company are up-to-date and we are using Windows 10. For whatever reason, you can't use the Oracle content on these platforms at all. This lapse is very bad for my company because I can't change the version of Word and downgrade. Maybe it is just a technical problem. But it is a lot of my problem with this solution currently.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It also helps with compliance and governance issues because it's a datastore that is not modifiable, and you can guarantee that. You cannot guarantee that with a folder-based file structure, where multiple people have access."
"The most useful feature is its persistent storage. Also, the full-text search and attribute searching are valuable."
"FileNet can for sure cover the requirements of a medium and a big company, because of the scalability and the possibility to connect with many other IBM products."
"We probably would not have seen adoption so strongly without it."
"The best part of FileNet includes its advantages and most valuable features, which are its scalability and stability."
"It provides good stability and scalability for huge enterprises as well."
"It has the ability to mix document management and process automation."
"One of our clients, a customer of IBM, rolled out and replaced their existing ECM system with FileNet. Their productivity has increased pretty dramatically."
"Integration within the solution is very good."
"Oracle integrates well with other products to cover Big Data."
"The WebCenter Content is its most valuable feature. After we update a document in WebCenter Content, it can be update automatically in our intranet."
"You can move workloads in between sub-servers so that you don't overload a portion of the server."
"A great solution for storing and searching large volumes of documents with easy access."
"WebCenter's interface is very user-friendly."
"It's a very scalable solution and the performance is pretty good. The scalability, in my opinion, is the biggest advantage."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, there can be issues with the database connections. FileNet has too many outages because things are broken in the database."
"I would love it if single sign-on was a lot easier to set up. That's the most difficult part of it."
"The new software and trends with the cloud solution is a little slow. I would like them to move toward more cloud-based and microservices rather than a SaaS model. This is where the industry is going and what customers are asking for."
"We would like to have more automation of rollout solutions."
"The FileNet API seems like it is very difficult and not transparent."
"There is room for improvement in the scanning solution, Datacap. It's improving all the time. But since it's more an end-user software, the end-users are constantly improving their processes, and I believe that sometimes we're not catching up with their requirements."
"We'd like to use the docker, to have it containerized."
"However, the configuration does take a long time. Every company needs its own configuration design. It depends on how many applications are connecting to FileNet. It can take a long time, depending on the application count."
"This solution needs to support translation into the Arabic language."
"Its functions need more stability."
"The speed of the backup should be enhanced."
"I would like them to add more Web 2.0 features."
"Does not seem to be totally compatible with Windows 10 as of our current version."
"WebCenter requires a lot of design effort to upload content to our regular system."
"There are many document management systems that offer pretty much the same functionalities but at a lower price. The product as such is pretty good. However, the pricing is not comparable. They need to adjust their pricing to be more competitive on the market."
"The solution should be offered in Persian. Right now, our version is in English, and there's a bit of a language barrier between the users and the product."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"FileNet is not cheap, but you absolutely get what you pay for. ​"
"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 biggest issue is the cost of the FileNet, because the license cost is very high. If a customer doesn't have good technical guides that are aware of the license calculation, they will pay too much. FileNet's license calculation depends on the processor and number of users. So my advice to a new customer is to be very careful with your calculations before purchasing FileNet."
"The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"WebCenter's pricing is on the higher side."
"The price of this solution is considered to be high; however, when speaking with Oracle, it is possible to get discounts of up to sixty percent."
"The price needs to be lowered."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
866,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
9%
Government
12%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business31
Midsize Enterprise12
Large Enterprise73
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise10
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM FileNet?
The product is robust and can process a lot of documents for enterprise content management.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for IBM FileNet?
From the company's perspective, the licensing cost for IBM FileNet is still affordable. Though the license cost is somewhat expensive, it remains manageable. The company rates it between 3 and 5 be...
What needs improvement with IBM FileNet?
The API provided by IBM FileNet is a very out-of-date implementation. From the beginning, we cannot use a REST API; we have to use the IBM FileNet native API, which is quite outdated.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

No data available
WebCenter, FatWire
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions.
Chhattisgarh Infotech and Biotech Promotion Society, Jagran Prakashan Ltd., Standard Forwarding LLC, United Automotive Electronic Systems Co. Ltd., INSO sistemi per le infrastrutture sociali S.p.A., Helsana Versicherungen AG, ArRiyadh Development Authority, John Lewis Partnership, Arqiva, SURUGADAI EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTE, Portuguese Official Agriculture and Fisheries
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FileNet vs. Oracle WebCenter and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
866,088 professionals have used our research since 2012.