We performed a comparison between Atlassian Confluence and SharePoint based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."With Confluence, everything is in one place, so it's easy to find documentation."
"As for valuable features, the team management features help us to share information very easily."
"It seems highly scalable. There are 500 end users using this solution."
"We value the way we can tag documentation to Jira because we can cross-reference a Jira ticket to a Confluence page, and we can also add a Confluence page to a Jira ticket."
"There is a good library of templates for a wide range of needs."
"It integrates well with other Atlassian products"
"Great shareable and co-editing features."
"We have found limiting permissions and history very valuable."
"Information is much more readily available."
"Our staff found it simpler, as they did not have to work within a classification system."
"The most valuable features are the Integrations, web site, and search."
"The workflow feature is valuable because it enables us to cascade responsibilities."
"It facilitates collaboration and the ability to create custom workflows."
"Combined reports and data with timeline tracking."
"Helps with document collaboration and workflow."
"It allows for simultaneous users to be on it."
"The product is considered expensive."
"The one way in which this solution could be improved is by offering better design and UI."
"When we import the data in Confluence from Word or any other document, the formatting is not correct."
"Atlassian Confluence's old versions consume too much memory, making it an area where optimization is required from an improvement perspective."
"The dashboards should be improved."
"The scalability for larger companies could be improved."
"I would like to see more macros provided by the company included in the license."
"It would be interesting if they had graphical templates that allowed typical agile ceremonies to be documented better."
"The company also needs to make sure that their policies are dictating how information is stored and used, instead of letting SharePoint take control."
"SharePoint designer workflows can be buggy sometimes without any apparent reason."
"Flexibility and extensibility, above everything, could be improved."
"It will fully use your system resources."
"SharePoint Online could improve the user interface and when modifying any of the user interfaces can be challenging. Additionally, there are challenges with the detail in the analytics user interface and the overall customization could improve."
"SharePoint’s scalability could be improved."
"Emails stored now do not display metadata in native format."
"You still need a bit of expertise to add branding."
Atlassian Confluence is ranked 2nd in Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) with 99 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) with 146 reviews. Atlassian Confluence is rated 8.2, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Atlassian Confluence writes "Good usability, helpful community support, and facilitates well-structured documentation ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SharePoint writes "Good integrations, helps with collaboration, and increases visibility". Atlassian Confluence is most compared with Microsoft Teams, Office 365, Microsoft OneDrive, Zendesk and Slack, whereas SharePoint is most compared with Citrix ShareFile, Microsoft OneDrive, Dropbox, WordPress and Hyland OnBase. See our Atlassian Confluence vs. SharePoint report.
See our list of best Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) vendors.
We monitor all Corporate Portals (Enterprise Information Portals) 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.
