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 Framer
We are the Adobe Experience Manager to Framer 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 Framer
Key advantages
If you live in Figma all day, Framer is the right choice for you. You can import your layouts, tweak a few interactions, hit publish, and suddenly you’ve “built a website” without ever opening VS Code. The no-code editor is fast, the animations look like you actually care about UI, and the built-in hosting + global CDN means you never have to touch a server or pretend you know what an SSL certificate is.
Multiple people can jump in, rewrite copy, adjust layouts, and preview the site instantly in real time with zero handoff pain, and “can you push this to staging?” nonsense. The SEO defaults are strong, images automatically behave, and performance is fast without you having to obsess over Lighthouse scores.
Can't knock the service, but we're here when you're looking to build something more scalable.
Ability to control layout with drag and drop
You can drag, drop, and publish without the need for any developer or having experience in website development. With Framer, you can easily turn your mockup into a working page.
Quick and cheap to build something
If you need a site yesterday (and on a budget), go ahead with Framer. You can go from a Figma-level idea to a live marketing page in a few hours without writing any code or having developers wait on stand-ups.
Some optimization comes by default
Framer quietly handles things like image compression, semantic markup, and basic SEO hygiene. You ship quickly, and the site doesn't fall apart in Lighthouse analyses.
Huge library of themes
You can pick a template, tweak a few components, and you’re basically done. Its theme library is stacked, and most of it looks “portfolio ready” right out of the box.
Real-time team collaboration
Multiple people can jump in, edit, comment, and tweak designs live like Figma. It speeds up feedback loops and kills the endless back-and-forth.
Intuitive, designer-friendly UI
If you know your way around Figma, you’ll be able to use Framer without any difficulty. Framer’s interface is simple, and keeps designers moving without begging a developer for help.
Common questions
Adobe Experience Manager to Framer migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Adobe Experience Manager to Framer 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 much does Framer cost for a real website?
As of 2026, Framer's site plans are Free, Basic at $10/month, Pro at $30/month, and Scale at $100/month (Scale is annual only). The free plan won't carry a real site. You get a framer.site subdomain and Framer branding. A custom domain starts on Basic, which gives you 2 CMS collections and 30 pages. Pro lifts that to 10 collections, 150 pages, and 2,500 CMS items, and beyond 10 you pay roughly $40 per extra 10 collections. The other catch is the per-seat and add-on pricing. Editors are $20/month each, content editors $10/month, and localisation runs $40 per language. So a small marketing site with a blog and two editors lands around $50-$70/month, and a multi-language content site climbs faster than the sticker price suggests. Compare that to a headless CMS on a free tier plus roughly $20/month hosting on Vercel, and Framer stops looking cheap once your team or your content grows.
Can you move a Framer site to a headless CMS without losing the design?
Yes, and we've done this for several clients. The design itself translates well to a modern frontend because Framer sites are essentially CSS layouts with animations. We rebuild the visual design in Next.js (or whatever framework fits), which usually produces a faster, more performant version of the same site. CMS content exports from Framer's collections through their API, though the data structures are simple so the migration is straightforward. Animations need manual recreation using a library like Motion for React, but the results are typically better than Framer's output. The whole process takes 4-8 weeks for a typical marketing site.
What are the best alternatives to Framer for a growing company?
It depends on what you're outgrowing. If you want to keep the visual editing experience, Webflow offers more CMS depth and ecommerce capabilities, though it has its own scaling limitations. If you want full control, a headless CMS (Sanity is our pick) paired with Next.js gives you unlimited flexibility in content modelling, design, and performance. Builder.io is worth considering if your marketing team needs to build pages independently, though the vendor lock-in is a concern. For most growing companies, we recommend the headless CMS plus custom frontend route because it scales without platform ceilings and your design is never limited by what a visual builder supports.
When should you stop using Framer and switch to something else?
Three signals tell you it's time. First, your CMS needs exceed what collections can handle. If you need relational content, structured data beyond flat lists, or more than a handful of collection types, Framer's CMS will hold you back. Second, content editing. Framer has no separate admin for editors, so anyone updating the blog works inside the full design file, which is a real problem once non-designers are involved. Third, development workflows. If your team includes developers who want version control, CI/CD pipelines, and the ability to write custom logic, Framer's no-code environment becomes a constraint. We've migrated Framer sites for companies that hit these walls together, usually around the 20-30 page mark with three or more content types.
Does Framer support headless or API content delivery?
Not really. Framer renders and hosts your site on its own infrastructure, and the CMS is built to feed that frontend, not to serve content over an API to another app. There is a read API for pulling collection data out, which is enough for an export or a migration, but you can't point a separate Next.js or mobile app at Framer as a content backend the way you would with Sanity or Contentful. If you need one content source feeding a website, an app, and a few other surfaces, Framer is the wrong shape. A headless CMS is built for exactly that.
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.
