Box, Inc. vs M-Files Content Collaboration
Box, Inc. vs M-Files Content Collaboration, compared side by side on 20 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Box, Inc. is on 35/100 and M-Files Content Collaboration on 56/100.
Where each one leads
Box, Inc.
- agent readiness: 52/100 against 45/100
- domain rating: 91/100 against 74/100
- headcount: 4,406 against 839
- funding raised: $888M against $201M
- LinkedIn following: 212,856 against 47,811
M-Files Content Collaboration
- our overall score: 56/100 against 35/100
At a glance
| Measure | Box, Inc. | M-Files Content Collaboration |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | Cloud content management platform for enterprise file storage, collaboration, and workflow automation, leveraging AI for enhanced security and insights. | Intelligent content management and automation platform for enterprise information. |
| Category | Cloud Content Management, File Sharing, Collaboration Software, Enterprise Software | Enterprise Software, Information Management, Content Management, Workflow Automation |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Platform | Software |
| Founded | 2005 | 2006 |
| Headquarters | Redwood City, United States | Plano, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Box, Inc. | M-Files Content Collaboration |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 4,406 | 839 |
| Headcount growthLast 12 months | +29.3% | Not published |
| Total funding | $888M | $201M |
| Latest round | Private Equity | Growth Equity |
| LinkedIn followers | 212,856 | 47,811 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Box, Inc. | M-Files Content Collaboration |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 35/100 | 56/100 |
| Traction | 60/100 | 60/100 |
| Team | 70/100 | 30/100 |
| Community | 8/100 | Not published |
| Search visibility | 45/100 | 23/100 |
| Quality | 15/100 | 68/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | D (52/100) | D (45/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 91/100 | 74/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Box, Inc. | M-Files Content Collaboration |
|---|---|---|
| CDN | Cloudflare | Cloudflare |
| CMS | Not detected | WordPress |
| Analytics | Not detected | Google Tag Manager |
| Open source | No | Yes |
Box, Inc. vs M-Files Content Collaboration: common questions
Which is better, Box, Inc. or M-Files Content Collaboration?
On our 0-100 score M-Files Content Collaboration rates higher (56/100 against 35/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 20 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Box, Inc. and M-Files Content Collaboration compare on the numbers?
Box, Inc. leads on agent readiness (52/100 against 45/100), domain rating (91/100 against 74/100), headcount (4,406 against 839), funding raised ($888M against $201M), LinkedIn following (212,856 against 47,811). M-Files Content Collaboration leads on our overall score (56/100 against 35/100).
Read the full Box, Inc. review and pricing or the M-Files Content Collaboration review and pricing. You can also browse other Box, Inc. alternatives we track.