Case study
View case studySlingshot Bio
Roboto converged Slingshot Bio's WordPress and Shopify sites into one headless Shopify build on Next.js and Sanity, instrumented end to end and AI-ready.
From Adobe Experience Manager to BaseHub
We are the Adobe Experience Manager to BaseHub migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Adobe Experience Manager
Key pain points
AEM’s biggest flaw is simple: everything about it is expensive. The license, the hosting, the maintenance, the consultants, the upgrades, and the people required to even use it. The learning curve is a cliff, implementation cycles move at glacial speed, and the UI feels like punishment for asking to edit content. Performance tanks the moment you customise anything, and collaboration is basically “email the PDF and pray.” If you ever see the word specialised in an AEM context, just assume the invoice comes with an extra zero.
It’s the definition of a heavyweight DXP built for organisations with more bureaucracy than sense. For everyone else, it becomes a slow-moving, over-engineered system that requires Adobe-certified babysitters just to stay alive. If you’re considering scrapping it for something faster, saner, and built this decade, we can help you migrate without dragging the AEM baggage along for the ride.
High complexity and cost
AEM is one of the most expensive CMS/DEXP platforms on the market, with licensing, hosting, and maintenance costs that only make sense for very large enterprises.
Steep learning curve
The platform is dense and requires specialised training just to perform routine tasks. Most teams can’t operate it without dedicated experts.
Prolonged implementation periods
Even simple projects take months. Rollouts, upgrades, and workflow changes move slowly and require careful planning to avoid breaking things.
Challenging navigation of capabilities
AEM packs in a huge feature set, but finding and configuring what you actually need can feel like wading through molasses.
Necessary reliance on Adobe partners
You’re essentially forced into using Adobe-certified agencies or consultants for setup, maintenance, and troubleshooting and they don’t come cheap.
Not ideal for smaller companies
The cost, complexity, and operational overhead make AEM a poor fit for startups or mid-sized teams. Most will drown in it long before they benefit from it.
Benefits of BaseHub
Key advantages
BaseHub CMS is generating buzz among developers for its fast, collaborative, and AI-powered environment. We really like the Notion style editor. Feels great to drop a / and you type in what you want. E.g heading, or bullet points etc.
It's pretty good for creating and organizing content. Even for teams that are new to CMS platforms. Features like easy nested repeater fields, real-time branching for team workflows, and seamless GraphQL integration impress both solo makers and growing agencies. The platform’s Typesafe approach and AI-assisted writing tools help speed up the publishing process, while modern UI design keeps the learning curve gentle for newcomers.
If you can handle the initial information overload when you first spin up an environment it's an incredible tool for collaboration and rapid site scaffolding.
They also have a pretty good freemium pricing model (nodody has as good as Sanity) and strong documentation help projects get off the ground quickly, especially for Next.js and React use cases. Frequent updates and community engagement is high, and the core team that built it, are from a really nice design focused agency. So can't knock it that much.
Intuitive Notion-style editor
If you can use Notion, you can get content into BaseHub without begging a developer for help. It is light, fast and easy to navigate
Effortless nested repeater fields
You can nest and stack content structures. It’s one of the few tools where complex schemas don’t instantly become a crime scene.
Real-time content branching
Branching lets teams experiment, test ideas, and push updates without breaking production. Preview changes instantly, merge when ready, panic never.
Ready-to-use GraphQL integration
BaseHub ships with clean, auto-generated GraphQL APIs, so developers don’t waste hours wiring resolvers or schema stitching. Query, fetch, and ship.
Typesafe SDK support
You get fully typed responses out of the box, which means fewer runtime surprises and a smoother dev experience. Your IDE becomes your safety net.
Collaborative team workflows
Teams can work together without stepping on each other’s toes, with clean approval flows and role-based editing. It’s built for fast-moving content teams.
Common questions
Adobe Experience Manager to BaseHub migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Adobe Experience Manager to BaseHub migration
How much does Adobe Experience Manager cost?
AEM is one of the most expensive CMS platforms going. Adobe publishes no list prices, so everything is a custom enterprise quote. From contracts we've seen, AEM Sites licensing tends to start around $60,000 per year on its own, and a full AEM as a Cloud Service deployment usually lands in the six figures, often $200,000 or more annually once you factor in usage. Implementation runs another $100,000 to $500,000+, and Adobe support contracts add 15-25% of licensing on top. We've watched companies pay more for their AEM contract than for their entire engineering team's salaries. If that ratio sounds familiar, it's time to rethink the stack.
Can I migrate from AEM to Sanity?
Yes, and it's one of the more common moves we handle. The work is real but tractable. For an enterprise instance, plan for a few weeks to a few months depending on how customised AEM is. The biggest bottleneck is content extraction. AEM's JCR (Java Content Repository) stores everything in a proprietary node structure that needs custom tooling to export cleanly. Custom OSGi bundles, Sling models, and heavy DAM workflows all get rebuilt or replaced, usually with something far simpler. We run a parallel build, standing up Sanity and a modern frontend while AEM stays live, then cut over once content and redirects are validated. Editorial teams keep working throughout.
What are AEM's main limitations?
Cost is the headline, but it isn't the only one. Development is slow because nearly everything routes through Java, OSGi, and Sling, so even small changes need a dedicated dev. Performance degrades the moment you customise the platform. The author UI is dense, and routine content work often still depends on engineers. You're also tied to Adobe-certified partners for setup and upkeep, and contracts tend to carry multi-year lock-ins. The headless side (Content Fragments served over GraphQL, plus the Universal Editor) works, but it's bolted onto a DXP monolith rather than built lean from the start.
Is AEM overkill for most sites?
For most sites, yes. AEM earns its keep when an organisation already lives inside Creative Cloud, Analytics, and Target and needs governance across hundreds of properties. If you're not using several of those Adobe tools, you're paying enterprise rates for a CMS that's slower to build on and more expensive to staff than the alternatives. We've met teams who adopted AEM on a consultant's recommendation, then found they used maybe 15% of it. A Sanity backend with a Next.js frontend would have cost a fraction and shipped faster. Three things to watch if you do leave. DAM assets with custom metadata and renditions don't transfer automatically. Dispatcher and Sling URL patterns need careful redirect mapping to hold SEO value. Contract lock-ins can carry steep early-termination fees.
How do we migrate content out of BaseHub?
BaseHub exposes content through its GraphQL API, so extraction means writing queries to pull your content tree and transforming the responses into your target CMS format. The nested repeater structure can make this tricky since deeply nested content needs to be flattened or re-mapped depending on where you're going. Media assets need to be downloaded and re-uploaded separately. For a typical project with moderate content volume, we budget 2 to 4 weeks for the full migration.
Why do teams leave BaseHub?
BaseHub is still a young platform, and teams hit its limits as projects grow. The most common complaints we hear are feature glitches in production, limited third-party integrations, and an interface that feels more like a database browser than a CMS. Localization support is weak, API rate limits bite harder than expected on high-traffic sites, and real-time collaboration can hiccup under pressure. Teams that need enterprise-grade reliability often outgrow BaseHub within 6 to 12 months.
Is BaseHub stable enough for production sites?
For small marketing sites and developer portfolios, BaseHub works fine. For anything with real traffic, multiple editors, or complex content workflows, we'd urge caution. The platform ships features quickly but stability doesn't always keep pace. We've seen branching break under pressure and collaboration features hiccup at inconvenient moments. If your business depends on publishing uptime, you want a CMS with a longer track record of production reliability.
Get in touch
Tell us what you're building. We reply within one working day — Jono or someone on the team picks up every message personally.
