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

OpenText Content Manager vs Oracle Content Management 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

OpenText Content Manager
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
10th
Ranking in Document Management Software
5th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.2
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
File Archiving (2nd)
Oracle Content Management
Ranking in Enterprise Content Management
17th
Ranking in Document Management Software
9th
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 September 2026, in the Enterprise Content Management category, the mindshare of OpenText Content Manager is 3.3%, down from 5.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oracle Content Management is 2.2%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Enterprise Content Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
OpenText Content Manager3.3%
Oracle Content Management2.2%
Other94.5%
Enterprise Content Management
 

Featured Reviews

AH
Enterprise Information Manager in Practice at Mannai
Improved content management with good reliability and an easy setup
We are a system integrator. We deal with client requirements to determine the best solutions that should be deployed. Our primary use case for OpenText Content Manager is managing enterprise content, such as documents and emails, as well as engineering document management OpenText Content Manager…
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."
"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."
"Customer Service: We appreciate HPE's team of resources, who assist us as issues arise."
"The product allows us to run our Notice of Destructions seamlessly and produces our annual folders with ease."
"We are required to have a robust Records Management system, and it does this job."
"Sharing of documents, reduction of duplication, and the ability to manage retention, disposition and overall records management have been significant benefits for our organization."
"An advantage is integration with your IP directory."
"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."
"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."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
 

Cons

"We have not yet utilized the web version, as we encountered a few issues during testing."
"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."
"Pricing is an issue, as it is too expensive."
"OpenText Content Manager needs to improve its user interface. Its installation process is difficult and can be made easier."
"The product could improve its scalability."
"Many users have expressed that it is too hard to find what they are looking for."
"Functionality gets removed as new versions are released."
"The system is difficult to navigate and understand the full scope of functionality available for end users to appreciate the value."
"I would like to see faster turnaround for provisioning new services."
"Oracle Content Management poses complexities in initial implementation and configuration."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 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."
"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 tool's licensing part is expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Government
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Manufacturing Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Construction Company
8%
Healthcare 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 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 is your primary use case for Micro Focus Content Manager?
We are a system integrator. We deal with client requirements to determine the best solutions that should be deployed. Our primary use case for OpenText Content Manager is managing enterprise conten...
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: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.