Usability Index for Web Content Management | Summer 2017
Web Content Management Market Definition
Web content management (WCM) systems allow users to create, edit, and publish digital content such as text, embedded audio and video files, and interactive graphics for websites. These systems make the process of uploading and writing content simple for users who do not have coding skills by offering theme-oriented templates for unique design. WCM systems are generally used in collaborative scenarios where multiple team members can monitor and manage web content. WCM solutions are most frequently utilized by digital marketing and creative teams. WCM systems can be plugged into third-party hosting platforms that provide more complete website management functionality. Some WCM systems can integrate with marketing software, third-party CMS tools, or content analytics programs. Others may provide functionality for digital asset management and web design. They share features with enterprise content management and e-commerce platforms.
To qualify for inclusion in the Web Content Management, a product must:
- Provide web-based editing and publishing capabilities for text, image, audio, and video files
- Offer templates for content creation
- Allow collaboration and approval for content creation
Usability Index Description
A product’s Usability score is calculated by a proprietary algorithm that factors in real-user satisfaction ratings for a number of use-related review questions. Software buyers can compare products in the Web Content Management category according to their Usability scores to streamline the buying process and quickly identify the most usable web content management products based on the experiences of their peers. For vendors, media, investors, and analysts, the Index provides benchmarks for product comparison and market trend analysis.
Badges are awarded to products for: Best Usability (highest overall Usability score), Easiest to Use (highest ease of use rating), Easiest Admin (highest ease of admin score), and Best Meets Requirements (highest meets requirements score).
Products included in the Usability Index for Web Content Management have received both a minimum of 10 reviews and 5 responses from real users for each of the use-related questions featured in our review form by June 05, 2017. These ratings may change as the products are further developed, the vendors grow, and as additional opinions are shared by users. A new Usability Index report will be issued for this category as significant data is collected.
HubSpot | WordPress.org | Solodev | Mura | Kentico | Sitefinity | idev CMS | Joomla | Evoq Content | Drupal | Episerver | Ingeniux CMS | Crownpeak | elcomCMS | Oracle | eZ Systems | ExpressionEngine | Umbraco | Adobe | Sitecore | OpenText TeamSite | Average | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ease of Use | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Purchase to View | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Ease of Use | 89% | 86% | 96% | 90% | 89% | 81% | 89% | 79% | 87% | 68% | 83% | 80% | 81% | 81% | 80% | 69% | 72% | 77% | 71% | 67% | 65% | ██ |
Ease of Admin | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Ease of Admin | ██ | |||||||||||||||||||||
Meets Requirements | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Meets Requirements | ██ | |||||||||||||||||||||
User Adoption | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Average User Adoption | ██ | |||||||||||||||||||||
Usability Score by Customer Segment
The Usability Score by Customer Segment chart below compares how users within different customer segments rated the usability of each product. Scores for small-business (employees of companies with fewer than 50 employees), mid-market (employees of companies with 51-1,000 employees), and enterprise-level (employees of companies with more than 1,000 employees) users are calculated using data only from reviewers in each specific segment.
Click on the charts underneath to see feedback from each segment on its own.
Products are only represented on a segmented chart if they have received 10 or more reviews and 5 or more responses to each of the use-related questions. As such, some products included in the overall chart may not appear on the segmented charts.
Small Business
Mid-Market
Enterprise
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: HubSpot (NYSE: HUBS)
- Location: Cambridge, MA
- Founded: 2006
- 2015 Revenue: $181.9 MM
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 2.28k
- Website: www.HubSpot.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: WordPress Foundation
- Location: San Francisco, CA
- Founded: 2003
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 2.09k
- Website: wordpress.org
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Solodev
- Location: Orlando, FL
- Founded: 2006
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 15
- Website: www.solodev.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Blue River Interactive Group
- Location: Sacramento, CA
- Founded: 2001
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 21
- Website: www.blueriver.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Kentico Software
- Location: Brno, Czech Republic
- Founded: 2004
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 220
- Website: www.kentico.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Progress (NASDAQ: PRGS)
- Location: Bedford, MA
- Founded: 1981
- 2015 Revenue: $377.6 MM
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 2.53k
- Website: www.progress.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Americaneagle.com
- Location: Des Plaines, IL
- Founded: 1978
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 291
- Website: www.americaneagle.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Open Source Matters, Inc.
- Location: New York, NY
- Founded: 2005
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 5
- Website: opensourcematters.org
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: DNN
- Location: San Mateo, CA
- Founded: 2006
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 83
- Website: www.dnnsoftware.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Drupal
- Location: Portland, OR
- Founded: 2001
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 105
- Website: www.drupal.org
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Episerver
- Location: Nashua, NH
- Founded: 1994
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 346
- Website: www.episerver.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Ingeniux
- Location: Seattle, WA
- Founded: 2000
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 44
- Website: www.ingeniux.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Crownpeak Technology
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Founded: 2001
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 130
- Website: www.crownpeak.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Elcom Technology Inc.
- Location: Eveleigh, Australia
- Founded: 1996
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 293
- Website: www.elcomCMS.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Oracle (NYSE: ORCL)
- Location: Redwood Shores, CA
- Founded: 1977
- 2016 Revenue: $37,047.0 MM
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 156k
- Website: www.oracle.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: eZ Systems
- Location: Porsgrunn, Norway
- Founded: 1999
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 125
- Website: ez.no
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: EllisLab
- Location: Los Angeles, CA
- Founded: 2001
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 6
- Website: ellislab.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Umbraco
- Location: Odense, Denmark
- Founded: 2005
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 32
- Website: umbraco.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Adobe (NASDAQ: ADBE)
- Location: San Jose, CA
- Founded: 1982
- 2015 Revenue: $4,795.5 MM
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 16.8k
- Website: www.adobe.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: Sitecore
- Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
- Founded: 1999
- 2017 Revenue: n/a (private company)
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 945
- Website: www.sitecore.net
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Data
Average User Adoption
Vendor Information
- Vendor: OpenText (NASDAQ: OTEX)
- Location: Waterloo, Canada
- Founded: 1991
- 2016 Revenue: $1,824.2 MM
- Employees (Listed on LinkedIn™): 8.66k
- Website: www.opentext.com
Top Industries Represented
Customer Segment Breakdown
Usability Index Methodology
Index Inclusion Criteria
Products included in the Usability Index for Web Content Management have received a minimum of 10 reviews and 5 responses for each of the use-related questions featured in our survey by June 5, 2017. Inviting other users, such as colleagues and peers, to join G2 Crowd and share authentic product reviews will accelerate this process and encourage the inclusion of additional products.
Usability Scoring Methodology
G2 Crowd rates products and vendors based on reviews gathered from our user community, as well as data aggregated from online sources and social networks. We apply a unique, patent-pending algorithm to this data to calculate the product's Usability score. The Summer 2017 Web Content Management Usability Index report is based off of scores calculated using the G2 Crowd usability algorithm v1.0 BETA from data collected through June 5, 2017. The Usability score is affected by the following (in order of importance):
- Customer satisfaction with the ease of use for each product based on reviews by G2 Crowd users
- Customer satisfaction with the ease of admin for each product based on reviews by G2 Crowd users
- Customer responses to the Meets Requirements question on G2 Crowd
- User adoption percentage based on reviews and by G2 Crowd users
- The number of reviews received on G2 Crowd; buyers trust a product with more reviews, and a greater number of reviews indicates a more representative and accurate reflection of the customer experience.
Categorization Methodology
Please visit G2 Crowd’s categorization methodology page to learn more about how products are categorized. For more in-depth information about how we refer to different types of software, please view our list of standard definitions.
Trust
Keeping our ratings unbiased is our top priority. We require the use of a LinkedIn account to validate a G2 Crowd user’s identity and employer, and we verify all reviews manually. We do not allow users to rate their employers' products or those of their employers' competitors. Though we share reviews from business partners (they often contain valuable content), we filter out business partner ratings in our aggregate ratings to avoid bias. Vendors cannot influence their ratings by spending time or money with us. Only the opinion of real users factors into the ratings.
© 2017 G2 Crowd, Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form without G2 Crowd’s prior written permission. While the information in this report has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, G2 Crowd disclaims all warranties as to the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of such information and shall have no liability for errors, omissions, or inadequacies in such information.
