We performed a comparison between Alfresco and Atlassian Confluence based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, OpenText, Box and others in Enterprise Content Management."I like the ease of use, sections, and calendar."
"The product allows engineering teams and developers to introduce new things in a seamless and easy way."
"Document repository."
"The most valuable feature is the flexibility of the searching elements of the metadata."
"The most valuable features is its design documentation abilities."
"It integrates well with other Atlassian products"
"The scalability is enough for our use cases. It covers all our needs."
"The solution is very intuitive and provides excellent content management."
"It's easy to use and you can create all types of pages."
"As for valuable features, the team management features help us to share information very easily."
"It is stable and reliable."
"The most beneficial aspect is real-time collaboration, allowing multiple users to work on the same documents simultaneously."
"I think the presentation layer could be improved - currently, it's too complex, and there are too many features cluttered all over the screen."
"I would like them to consider document capture functionality."
"Alfresco has a very steep learning curve, and unfortunately, during the learning process, it's very easy to make errors, which often are unforgiving."
"Metadata, auto class, disposition log, and legal hold."
"There is room for improvement in maybe the tree structure for articles. If you have a lot of articles, it becomes difficult to navigate."
"Some macros can be technical, and they are better managed on the Confluence cloud rather than on-premises. For example, when you add an image on the cloud, you can resize it just by using the mouse. This is not the case on-premises yet. You have to write pixels of the size of the image sometimes. Some of the very old macros are still there, and some of them are technical. It can be hard for users if they are not from an IT background to understand how to use them quickly."
"The cost of the solution is too high."
"The product is considered expensive."
"The dashboards should be improved."
"In the next release, I would like to have the ability to import pictures."
"There is room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"When we have a project that we don't want to share with everybody but want people to know that it exists, there is no way to do this in Confluence. When a project is not shared, people cannot see that it exits."
Alfresco is ranked 9th in Enterprise Content Management with 10 reviews while Atlassian Confluence is ranked 2nd in Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) with 99 reviews. Alfresco is rated 8.0, while Atlassian Confluence is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Alfresco writes "Flexible and customizable but lacking integration with Microsoft". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Atlassian Confluence writes "Good usability, helpful community support, and facilitates well-structured documentation ". Alfresco is most compared with SharePoint, Hyland OnBase, OpenText Documentum, IBM FileNet and Oracle Content Management, whereas Atlassian Confluence is most compared with Microsoft Teams, Office 365, Microsoft OneDrive, SharePoint and Zendesk.
We monitor all Enterprise Content Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.