TrustRadius: an HG Insights company

IBM FileNet Content Manager vs. Nuxeo

Save this comparison

Save this comparison

Add Product

Recommended Comparisons

    Overview
    ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price

    IBM FileNet Content Manager

    Score8 out of 10
    N/AIBM FileNet Content Manager is a cloud-native content services solution to manage, share and collaborate on content to save employees’ time and improve customer experiences. This ECM solution includes functionality for document management, business process management, case management, content analytics, imaging, records management, and information governance. The IBM FileNet Content Manager content management solution provides the foundation for IBM Cloud Pak® for Business Automation. It uses AI…N/A

    Nuxeo

    Score7.9 out of 10
    N/AThe Hyland Nuxeo Platform is a cloud-native, cloud-first, scalable solution which utilizes automation technologies to improve efficiencies, increase accuracy, and provide its capabilities. With it’s low-code technology, organizations can implement Hyland’s Nuxeo Platform with customizable features that allow organizations to develop a creative workflow. Employees can then create, tag, organize, and share dynamic content, including rich media and 3D digital assets and their metadata to be used in…N/A
    Pricing
    IBM FileNet Content ManagerNuxeo
    Editions & Modules
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Offerings
    Pricing Offerings
    IBM FileNet Content ManagerNuxeo
    Free Trial
    NoYes
    Free/Freemium Version
    NoYes
    Premium Consulting/Integration Services
    YesYes
    Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalOptional
    Additional Details——
    More Pricing Information
    Community Pulse
    IBM FileNet Content ManagerNuxeo
    Considered Both Products
    IBM
    No answer on this topic
    Hyland
    Chose Nuxeo
    It was more costly and less supportive than Nuxeo.
    Incentivized
    Chose Nuxeo
    It is built on open-source technologies. A very small footprint is required to run it. It can be run in a cloud and utilize the power of cloud services, unlike other competitors.
    Incentivized
    Key User Insights
    Would buy again
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Delivers good value for the price
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Happy with the feature set
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Lived up to sales and marketing promises
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Implementation went as expected
    No answers on this topic
    No answers on this topic
    Features
    IBM FileNet Content ManagerNuxeo
    Enterprise Content Management
    Comparison of Enterprise Content Management features of IBM FileNet Content Manager and Nuxeo
    Feature
    IBM FileNet Content Manager
    7.9
    23 Ratings
    Nuxeo
    8.0
    23 Ratings
    Content capture & imaging8.419 Ratings8.220 Ratings
    File sync, storage & archiving8.621 Ratings8.123 Ratings
    Document management8.423 Ratings8.221 Ratings
    Records management7.321 Ratings8.120 Ratings
    Content search & retrieval8.221 Ratings8.122 Ratings
    Enterprise content collaboration8.023 Ratings7.818 Ratings
    Content publishing & creation8.720 Ratings8.022 Ratings
    Security, risk management & information governance7.822 Ratings7.419 Ratings
    Contract lifecycle management7.918 Ratings8.216 Ratings
    Automated workflows6.619 Ratings8.223 Ratings
    Artificial intelligence8.116 Ratings7.317 Ratings
    Mobile support6.715 Ratings7.115 Ratings
    Integration8.421 Ratings8.720 Ratings
    User Ratings
    IBM FileNet Content ManagerNuxeo
    Likelihood to Recommend
    8.2
    (23 ratings)
    7.5
    (23 ratings)
    Usability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    6.7
    (12 ratings)
    Performance
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.5
    (12 ratings)
    Support Rating
    6.0
    (1 ratings)
    6.6
    (11 ratings)
    In-Person Training
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.3
    (1 ratings)
    Online Training
    -
    (0 ratings)
    8.2
    (1 ratings)
    Implementation Rating
    -
    (0 ratings)
    7.4
    (12 ratings)
    Configurability
    -
    (0 ratings)
    9.1
    (1 ratings)
    Ease of integration
    5.2
    (17 ratings)
    -
    (0 ratings)