Compare IBM FileNet vs. SharePoint
IBM FileNet is ranked 2nd in Enterprise Content Management with 60 reviews while SharePoint is ranked 1st in Enterprise Content Management with 36 reviews. IBM FileNet is rated 8.2, while SharePoint is rated 7.8. 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 SharePoint writes "The metadata services, the WCF service integration and the Voxel feature are three most valuable elements of this solution". IBM FileNet is most compared with SharePoint, OpenText ECM and IBM ECM, whereas SharePoint is most compared with OpenText ECM, Box and Documentum. See our IBM FileNet vs. SharePoint report.
Most Helpful Review | |
 Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FileNet vs. SharePoint and other solutions. Updated: January 2020. 396,515 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 | |
I like the security and also the configuration. It is easy to configure and most of our business use cases have everything just with the configuration itself. 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. | The online editing capabilities, file sharing, auditing, information security, ease of solution management, and the easy user adaptation to the platform are the most valuable features. The most valuable features are the Integrations, web site, and search. This solution has helped us with the categorization, organization, management, discovery, and delivery of program and project related information. For any organization with more than one person in it, if they are trying to organize things to let people in the company know what others are doing, then this solution is good for them. The workflow feature is valuable because it enables us to cascade responsibilities. It has helped us with storing all the documents, which means that people are not going to intervene. There is a way of extracting knowledge within documentation and tracking it. There are knowledge assets for where documentation is stored, indexed and searchable through SharePoint. The metadata services, the WCF service integration and the Voxel feature are three most valuable elements of this solution. Tech support tops off as excellent. |
Cons | |
Developers like us have an upgraded interface. That interface does not work in the process that we have today. It hangs and is not user-friendly. 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. | The way to change the version of the files in SharePoint should be improved. The method of synchronizing files from local to cloud can also use improvement. The areas of this solution that need improvement are the relationships between lists, cross-site web parts, and page-building tools. This solution would benefit from the implementation of enhanced online forms and template development capabilities. I would like a simpler, more cost-effective solution for connecting data sources with workflows and BI tools, or data mining tools. Workflow is something that can become more intelligent. Search can be improved a lot because we are always trying to compare it with Google Search. Beyond that, it would be helpful to tag the documents. The initial setup was very complex. I understand that some functions are lost when you store the information in a file system, so maybe that's a way SharePoint can improve. |
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. | For this type of solution, it is not wise to buy it without Software Assurance. The pricing works for us. The cost is expensive, but worthwhile. We have purchased add-ons to handle multiple site collections, form creation, and design. The data classification and search elements are cheap. The replacement costs for it are cheaper if you use only SharePoint. It is very expensive. |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Enterprise Content Management solutions are best for your needs. 396,515 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Ranking  | |
Views 12,223 Comparisons 6,991 Reviews 60 Average Words per Review 615 Avg. Rating 8.2 | Views 38,114 Comparisons 31,748 Reviews 36 Average Words per Review 297 Avg. Rating 7.7 |
Top Comparisons | |
 Compared 21% of the time.  Compared 17% of the time.  Compared 15% of the time. | Compared 9% of the time.  Compared 9% of the time. Compared 7% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| SharePoint 2007, SharePoint 2010 | |
Learn | |
| IBM | Microsoft |
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. | SharePoint is a Microsoft-based platform for building web applications. It covers a widerange of capabilities and while it is appropriate for experienced webdevelopers, even non-technical minded users can easily navigate through thesystem and execute functions such as collaborating data, managing documents andfiles, creating websites, managing social networking solutions, and automatingworkflow. Major areas that SharePoint deals with are websites,communities, content, search, insights, and composites. The purpose is to give usersthe ability to create or develop these key business components on their owneven without technical knowledge of, for example, how to build a website or howto integrate coding. Configuring SharePoint into a business's system is meantto cut out all of the complicated steps, and pave the way for easierimplementation all around. |
Offer | |
Learn more about IBM FileNet | Learn more about SharePoint |
Sample Customers | |
| Suncorp Group Limited, St. Vincent Health, Citigroup, SRCSD, and UK Dept for Work and Pensions. | Toyota, Aeroports de Paris, ASBBank Ltd., Barking, Havering and Redbridge University Hospitals, CambridgeshireConstabulary, D&M Group, NPL Construction Company, and The Regional Municipality of Niagara. |
Top Industries | |
Financial Services Firm35% Insurance Company15% Healthcare Company11% Government6% Software R&D Company38% Comms Service Provider21% Financial Services Firm9% Government6% | Financial Services Firm14% University10% Comms Service Provider8% Energy/Utilities Company8% Software R&D Company26% Financial Services Firm12% Government8% Comms Service Provider7% |
Company Size | |
Small Business23% Midsize Enterprise12% Large Enterprise64% | Small Business36% Midsize Enterprise22% Large Enterprise42% Small Business26% Midsize Enterprise8% Large Enterprise65% |
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM FileNet vs. SharePoint and other solutions. Updated: January 2020.
396,515 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also IBM FileNet Reviews, SharePoint Reviews, and our list of Best Enterprise Content Management Companies.
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.