Skip to content




Adobe Experience Manager logo
Payload logo

From Adobe Experience Manager to Payload

We are the Adobe Experience Manager to Payload 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.

Help me migrate


High complexity and cost

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

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

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

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

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

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 Payload

Key advantages

Payload is genuinely strong tech. It’s fast, open-source, developer-first, and perfect if you want full control over your content model. The Next.js integration is smooth, the admin UI is clean, and it’s one of the more flexible modern CMS options if your team prefers to build things exactly the way you want them.

Just know that if you want actual features like visual editing, Vercel Blob storage, image handling, etc, you’ll be paying extra for the privilege. If you’re considering Payload or thinking about migrating into (or out of) it, reach out to us. We can help you figure out whether it’s the right stack or guide you toward a cleaner, saner (Sanity) setup.

Start my migration


Integration with Next.js applications

Integration with Next.js applications

Payload works natively with Next.js, giving you clean data fetching and a smooth development flow. It removes the usual CMS friction so you can build fast, modern frontends without hacks.

Fully customizable

Fully customizable

Everything is configured in code, which means you can tailor the CMS to your exact use case. You define the logic, workflows, and behaviour.

Supports custom data models

Supports custom data models

You can design any content structure your project needs, from simple documents to complex relational models. This gives you full control over how content is organised and delivered.

Intuitive admin UI

Intuitive admin UI

Payload’s admin panel is simple, clean, and fast. Editors can create, update, and manage content without training or digging through confusing menus.

Custom plugins and APIs

Custom plugins and APIs

You can extend Payload however you like. Build custom fields, integrate external services, or add your own API routes. Perfect for teams that need deeper project-specific functionality.

Built-in authentication

Built-in authentication

Payload comes with user auth, roles, and access control baked in. No external auth service needed, and you can customise permissions to match your editorial workflow.





Common questions

Adobe Experience Manager to Payload migration FAQs

Answers to the most common questions about Adobe Experience Manager to Payload 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 hard is it to migrate away from Payload CMS?
Payload stores content in MongoDB or Postgres, so extracting your data is straightforward compared to proprietary platforms. The real work is restructuring your content model for the target CMS and rebuilding any custom access control logic you've written. We typically complete Payload migrations in 3 to 6 weeks depending on how much custom backend logic is involved. The code-first nature of Payload means most of the content model is well-documented in your own codebase, which actually makes migration planning easier.
What are the main reasons teams leave Payload?
The most common reasons we hear are infrastructure fatigue and ecosystem gaps. Payload requires you to manage your own database, hosting, auth, and scaling. Teams that chose Payload for its developer flexibility eventually realise they're spending more time on DevOps than on content features. The Figma acquisition in 2025 also shifted priorities. Payload paused new Cloud project deployments afterward (existing projects keep running), and some teams feel the platform's direction became less predictable. Visual editing and live preview still require significant custom engineering compared to platforms that ship them natively.
What does a Payload to Sanity migration cost?
For a typical content site with 200 to 1,000 documents, we estimate 4 to 6 weeks of work. The bulk of effort goes into rebuilding the admin experience and frontend integration, not the data transfer itself. Payload's MongoDB exports are clean, so content migration scripts run reliably. The cost depends heavily on how much custom auth logic and access control you've built, since that needs to be rebuilt in the target platform's permission system. We scope every migration individually after reviewing your Payload config.


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.