Contentstack vs. OpenText Web CMS

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Contentstack
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
Contentstack headquartered in San Francisco offers an API-first headless CMS. From desktops to smart phones, from kiosks to smart watches, from billboards to jumbotrons, from dashboards to VR headsets – content is delivered with the push of a button and optimized for every screen, device and channel.N/A
OpenText Web CMS
Score 5.0 out of 10
N/A
OpenText Web CMS (TeamSite) accelerates and simplifies the end-to-end digital content and campaign lifecycle, from content creation and rich media management to omnichannel publication, optimization, automation, commerce, and community. According to the vendor, with TeamSite, users can: Capture diverse digital audiences with amazing brand experiences – Give customers and prospects consistent, high-quality brand experiences across devices and channels, and foster closer…N/A
Pricing
ContentstackOpenText Web CMS
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ContentstackOpenText Web CMS
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ContentstackOpenText Web CMS
Features
ContentstackOpenText Web CMS
Security
Comparison of Security features of Product A and Product B
Contentstack
7.4
Ratings
9% below category average
OpenText Web CMS
8.6
Ratings
6% above category average
Role-based user permissions7.40 Ratings8.60 Ratings
Platform & Infrastructure
Comparison of Platform & Infrastructure features of Product A and Product B
Contentstack
7.5
Ratings
1% below category average
OpenText Web CMS
7.9
Ratings
4% above category average
API8.10 Ratings8.70 Ratings
Internationalization / multi-language6.90 Ratings7.20 Ratings
Web Content Creation
Comparison of Web Content Creation features of Product A and Product B
Contentstack
8.1
Ratings
5% above category average
OpenText Web CMS
8.0
Ratings
4% above category average
WYSIWYG editor8.10 Ratings7.80 Ratings
Code quality / cleanliness10.00 Ratings7.70 Ratings
Admin section7.70 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Page templates7.70 Ratings7.40 Ratings
Library of website themes10.00 Ratings8.30 Ratings
Mobile optimization / responsive design6.60 Ratings8.30 Ratings
Publishing workflow6.80 Ratings8.10 Ratings
Form generator00 Ratings8.00 Ratings
Web Content Management
Comparison of Web Content Management features of Product A and Product B
Contentstack
6.4
Ratings
14% below category average
OpenText Web CMS
7.9
Ratings
7% above category average
Content taxonomy7.20 Ratings7.90 Ratings
SEO support6.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Bulk management5.70 Ratings8.20 Ratings
Availability / breadth of extensions6.50 Ratings7.50 Ratings
Community / comment management6.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
ContentstackOpenText Web CMS
Small Businesses
ManageWP
ManageWP
Score 10.0 out of 10
ManageWP
ManageWP
Score 10.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
Enterprises
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
RWS Tridion Sites
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
ContentstackOpenText Web CMS
Likelihood to Recommend
9.5
(0 ratings)
7.4
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
3.6
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.3
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.2
(0 ratings)
6.4
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
ContentstackOpenText Web CMS
Likelihood to Recommend
Contentstack has flexible functionality which opens up a lot of possibilities for businesses with proactive web development teams to create their own website builder app to compete with 3rd party agencies. This is especially useful in a large enterprise where non-technical teams often turn to expensive outside agencies which cost more in the long run than an up-front investment into an in-house application.
Read full review
OpenText TeamSite is well-suited to large, enterprise-wide implementations where customization, content governance, and dynamic content distribution is needed or prioritized. It is probably not ideal for smaller sites with simple architecture and few resources to manage custom implementation.
Read full review
Pros
  • The user interface is intuitive and cleanly designed.
  • The functionality is flexible which allows us to build our own application behind the CMS that meets business needs without being restricted by limitations in the CMS.
  • The service we get from our Account Manager and Technical contacts is excellent.
Read full review
  • Offering compelling experiences to customers, which help in improving satisfaction
  • Information is delivered across multiple channels
  • Testing relevant result sets to improve the rate of website conversion
Read full review
Cons
  • In my opinion it's not very intuitive. I've found its difficult to understand how to best structure entries, especially if they are related
  • In my experience, entries can get difficult to understand if weren't the creator. It would be helpful to have some meta data around the entry itself and the fields within them in my opinion.
  • Integration with an A/B testing platform would be nice.
Read full review
  • I have recommendation for improvements.
  • It is easy to work with all the features.
  • All necessary content management tools are included.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
Overall, it's a solid package with the potential to offer much functionality with appropriate resources applied. There are a few issues with the authoring interface that OpenText should address before its a top shelf authoring experience.
Read full review
Support Rating
They have an in-app chat with their support team, who is always quick to respond and provide helpful answers. I've never walked away from an interaction without my issue being solved quickly and easily. They're also very communicative over email and are sure to follow up after any changes are made to ensure we're seeing the desired result. They are always very professional and easy to work with.
Read full review
Our technical resources engage with OpenText TeamSite so I don't have direct experience. However, critical issues that we need help with seem to get the attention they deserve without issue. However, training and user resources for business owner roles are a bit lacking and some annoying issues with the authoring interface should be addressed sooner.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Contentstack has better international hosting support then Contentful and we found the presales and sales support people were MUCH more responsive than Contentful. The Sitecore sales process was very very slow and overly complex. We felt Sitecore had many features that were not valuable and the cost to benefit ratio was much lower compared to ContentStack
Read full review
It offers more content editing features at a relatively low cost thus overall deployment is lower in cost. It has great customer support who are always there to support and answer to our needs thus making the process of deployment seamless at every stage and offering training for working with their product.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • We are able to prepare for large campaigns within a few days which can bel rolled our within a few clicks. This was previously never possible before we moved to Contentstack.
  • We now have the tools and ability to architect in a way to take advantage of SEO and drive traffic. Our blog now serves more traffic that the rest of our website. This SEO effort wasn't possible before Contentstack.
  • One of our KPI's for moving to headless was a faster website and we now deliver pages under our original target while serving more asset and content rich pages to visitors
Read full review
  • We integrated with google analytics, now we have the proper comprehension of our audience data reception and behaviors - we've greatly improved on personalized marketing.
  • Quick publication of content across the main digital channels.
  • We run our digital campaigns swiftly.
  • We've maintained our brand consistency for three years.
Read full review
ScreenShots