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

OpenText Content Manager vs Oracle Content Management 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

OpenText Content Manager
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
9th
Ranking in Document Management Software
4th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
File Archiving (4th)
Oracle Content Management
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
12th
Ranking in Document Management Software
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 4.3%, up from 4.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Content Management is 2.6%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Content Manager4.3%
Oracle Content Management2.6%
Other93.1%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

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.
SK
Principal Data Scientist at Tata Consultancy
Built-in integrations increase efficiency but cluster support requires improvement
On the ITM side, there are conflicts, particularly on the convergence side, where it does not support cluster environments. Multiple instances need to be set up and configured. In the cloud environment, improvements are ongoing. The fallback and benefit assessment of the product suggest a need for a rating of seven or eight.

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 features of OpenText Content Manager are its stability, reliability, security, and workflow engine."
"Sharing of documents, reduction of duplication, and the ability to manage retention, disposition and overall records management have been significant benefits for our organization."
"Eliminated the need for paper records."
"The product can be integrated with different solutions."
"The product is valuable generally due to its wide use and acceptance in the public sector in my region."
"HPE Content Manager provides organizations with a reliable system for managing massive amounts of information, in a structured, compliant and secure way, with a level of functionality and reliability that I have not seen matched by custom-built or other systems."
"The product allows us to run our Notice of Destructions seamlessly and produces our annual folders with ease."
"For a records management system, Content Manager is a really good system."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The reliability of the system is significant, creating a lot of trust among our customers."
"It's a comprehensive solution for managing documents within our organization's management framework."
"There are competitors out there, but there's a lot that Oracle Cloud offers outside of giving you just a basic database or basic infrastructure-as-a-service that add a lot of value to it."
 

Cons

"We now have 2 proxies, 5 distribution servers and about 40 IDOL engines with tons of data on CEs. It is a scalable solution, but we see performance degradation and maintenance nightmares."
"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."
"Many users have expressed that it is too hard to find what they are looking for."
"The stability of the solution is an area of concern where improvements can be made."
"Generally speaking, HPE’s support for the product has been weak since the acquisition from TOWER Software."
"The ease of use should be addressed."
"Support could be enhanced. The first line of support consists of individuals who lack experience with some key aspects. When you create a support ticket, the time to resolve the issue may be prolonged because the first person may not understand the system or the solution."
"It's not very good at providing stable and robust add-ins to Microsoft."
"I would like to see faster turnaround for provisioning new services."
"The only issue my company has with the tool is the licensing part, which is expensive."
"On the ITM side, there are conflicts, particularly on the convergence side, where it does not support cluster environments."
"Oracle Content Management poses complexities in initial implementation and configuration."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"I would suggest that you do a thorough evaluation of all competing products and look for support for these products in your local area."
"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."
"The fees incurred are for the licensing and maintenance."
"The tool's licensing part is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
13%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
University
7%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
 

Company Size

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

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Micro Focus Content Manager?
An advantage is integration with your IP directory.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is a disadvantage as it is very expensive, especially in this market.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Content Manager?
Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive. Support and services need to be more user-friendly. The support has been slow, and there is room for improvement. Additionally, they could improve build...
What needs improvement with Oracle Content Management?
On the ITM side, there are conflicts, particularly on the convergence side, where it does not support cluster environments. Multiple instances need to be set up and configured. In the cloud environ...
What is your primary use case for Oracle Content Management?
I use Oracle Content Management for multiple projects, applications, and vendors.
What advice do you have for others considering Oracle Content Management?
I recommend Oracle Content Management due to its stability, support, and scalability. However, some improvements are needed, especially in AI integration. Overall, I would rate it seven.
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Content Manager, HPE Records Manager, HPE Content Manager
Oracle Document and Process Cloud, Oracle Content and Experience Cloud
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Missouri State Courts
TekStream Solutions LLC, NetCompany, AFG, Pride Mobility, TEAM Informatics Pty Ltd., Sutton Tools, Mythics, Inc., DVLA
Find out what your peers are saying about OpenText Content Manager vs. Oracle Content Management and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.