Compare IBM FileNet vs. Oracle WebCenter

IBM FileNet is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Content Management with 61 reviews while Oracle WebCenter is ranked 11th in Enterprise Content Management with 4 reviews. IBM FileNet is rated 8.2, while Oracle WebCenter is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of IBM FileNet writes "Easy to integrate, and enables our clients to guarantee compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle WebCenter writes "Gives me easy access, connection and compatibility with all of the Oracle products". IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText ECM and Alfresco, whereas Oracle WebCenter is most compared with SharePoint, WebLogic Suite and Oracle Content and Experience Cloud.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
IBM FileNet Logo
11,303 views|6,913 comparisons
Oracle WebCenter Logo
3,283 views|2,686 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Mehdi Hasankhan.M
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, IBM, OpenText and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: October 2019.
371,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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

Pros
The application, in terms of durability, has been able to withstand the usage, given that it was installed in 2003 and it's still working.One of the most valuable features is FileNet's ability to capture things from the stack, from e-mail, to scanning of Excel and Word. FileNet can also convert many types of files to PDFs very easily.FileNet has the capabilities to meet compliance and regulatory requirements. It is very secure.FileNet is very user-friendly... We have business users using and it is quite friendly for them.The most valuable feature is access control.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 valuable features are] scalability and ease of use. These features are important because the customer where we have deployed it has millions of documents... And over the last five years, the volume of the documents has been increasing. It's handling all of them and without any errors.We use IBM Datacap's capabilities to capture data and then we use FileNet's capabilities for filing, to create an archive of documents... We [also] use FileNet's ability to expose information via APIs and interoperate with other systems.

Read more »

It's a very scalable solution and the performance is pretty good. The scalability, in my opinion, is the biggest advantage.Oracle integrates well with other products to cover Big Data.A great solution for storing and searching large volumes of documents with easy access.The WebCenter Content is its most valuable feature. After we update a document in WebCenter Content, it can be update automatically in our intranet.

Read more »

Cons
Our client feels FileNet does not provide them with content searchability. They feel it's cumbersome. They're only using Metadata. If the Metadata is not well-populated, it becomes a problem to retrieve a document.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.There is some confusion with FileNet workflow. It's not really going into the next level. They are probably replacing it with BPM's workflow. So there's an issue of clarity, the vision for going forward.I would like to see it able to capture NLP in an advanced search. It would also be good if it could capture images and segregate them in categories within a span of seconds.The FileNet API seems like it is very difficult and not transparent.The area of migrations to new versions must be made easier. It's quite good that they have now begun to improve the API area, to modernize the interfaces, but there's always a very big investment involved in migrating from one version to another. That prohibits rolling out new functionalities to customers. It's not so easy.... In that area, they really must improve.There is room for improvement in the file management. It's very complex.IBM has a lot of documentation but the kind of information in a lot of the documents can be confusing to our clients. It would be easier if they used video tutorials. Right now, the information is too hard to understand, and there is a lot of it. If they used videos I think FinalNet would be easy to use for an end-user.

Read more »

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.This solution needs to support translation into the Arabic language.Does not seem to be totally compatible with Windows 10 as of our current version.I would like them to add more Web 2.0 features.Its functions need more stability.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
FileNet is quite expensive, although Documentum is expensive too.Licensing costs depend on the size of the storage.The cost is about $40,000, plus yearly maintenance.The licensing cost of FileNet is comparable.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.Yearly, we pay for the maintenance, which is $20,000.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.It has reduced operating costs by reducing the amount of manual work needed.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs.
371,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
11,303
Comparisons
6,913
Reviews
60
Average Words per Review
595
Avg. Rating
8.3
Views
3,283
Comparisons
2,686
Reviews
1
Average Words per Review
161
Avg. Rating
5.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 12% of the time.
Compared 23% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Also Known As
WebCenter, FatWire
Learn
IBM
Oracle
Overview

IBM FileNet is a leading IBM enterprise content management product family. IBM FileNet is one of the ECM solutions that can change the way a company does business by enabling users to capture, activate, socialize, analyze, and govern content throughout its lifecycle.

There are many IBM FileNet products available, all of which are integrated and based on the FileNet P8 Platform.

Oracle WebCenter is the center of engagement for business powering exceptional experiences for customers, partners, and employees. It connects people, processes, and information with the most complete portfolio of portal, content management, Web experience management, and collaboration technologies. 

Offer
Learn more about IBM FileNet
Learn more about Oracle WebCenter
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
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm34%
Insurance Company14%
Healthcare Company12%
Comms Service Provider7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company37%
Comms Service Provider18%
Financial Services Firm14%
Government5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company54%
Government10%
Comms Service Provider5%
Outsourcing Company5%
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, IBM, OpenText and others in Enterprise Content Management. Updated: October 2019.
371,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email