Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform

From Agility CMS to Builder.io
Key pain points
The pricing is the elephant in the room. Starting at $1,249/month for the lowest tier, Agility is significantly more expensive than most headless CMS competitors. For smaller agencies or startups, that's a hard sell when platforms like Sanity or Contentful offer free tiers and more gradual scaling. If a client needs template customizations beyond what's available, those changes often require going through Agility's team at additional cost, which can slow things down.
The editor experience, while better than most headless CMS tools, still has rough edges. The content preview has a noticeable delay which frustrates editors used to real-time feedback. Component nesting can feel limited when building complex layouts, and creating unique page designs sometimes requires creating an excessive number of components as workarounds. The initial setup and configuration is also more involved than the marketing suggests, particularly for teams coming from traditional CMS platforms.
The ecosystem and community are noticeably smaller than competitors like Contentful or Sanity. There's less community-generated content, fewer third-party plugins, and Stack Overflow coverage is thin. When you hit an edge case, you're more reliant on the support team than community knowledge. The platform also lacks JSON field support in content models, which limits some advanced use cases that other headless CMS tools handle natively.

Expensive entry point
Starting at $1,249/month with no free tier, it's one of the priciest headless CMS options. Hard to justify for smaller projects or clients with lean budgets.

Slow content preview
The preview function has a noticeable delay before changes appear, making it less immediate compared to tools like Sanity or Storyblok that offer real-time feedback.

Steep initial setup
Despite marketing claims of simplicity, the initial configuration requires significant effort. Advanced features and custom setups demand real technical expertise.

Limited component nesting
Building complex, deeply nested layouts can feel restrictive. You often end up creating numerous individual components as workarounds for unique page designs.

Small community and ecosystem
Far fewer plugins, community resources, and Stack Overflow answers compared to Contentful or Sanity. When you hit edge cases, you're mostly on your own.

Missing JSON field support
No native JSON datatype in content models, which limits flexibility for advanced structured data use cases that other headless CMS platforms handle easily.
Key advantages
Builder.io occupies a unique spot in the headless CMS landscape. It is not really a traditional headless CMS in the way that Sanity or Contentful are. It is more of a visual page builder with headless capabilities bolted on. That distinction matters because if your marketing team needs to ship landing pages fast without filing Jira tickets, Builder.io genuinely delivers on that promise. The drag-and-drop editor is solid, and the ability to register your own React components so that non-developers can compose pages from your actual design system is a legitimately powerful idea.
Where Builder.io really shines is in bridging the gap between developers and marketing teams. You build the components, register them with Builder, and then hand the keys over. Marketers can assemble pages, run A/B tests, and publish without touching code. For agencies like ours, this means fewer "can you just move this banner" tickets and more time spent on actual engineering work.
The framework support is also genuinely broad. Next.js, React, Angular, Vue, Svelte, Qwik, SolidJS, and React Native all have SDKs. If you are running a modern JavaScript stack, Builder.io probably has an integration for it. The AI features they have been shipping are interesting too, though still early days in terms of real production reliability.

Visual drag-and-drop editor
The visual editor lets non-technical users build and edit pages using your actual codebase components. It is one of the better implementations of visual editing in the headless space.

Custom component registration
Developers can register their own React, Vue, or Angular components so editors drag and drop real design system pieces rather than generic blocks.

A/B testing and personalisation built in
Native experimentation tools let marketing teams run split tests and personalise content without needing a separate optimisation platform.

Broad framework support
SDKs for Next.js, React, Angular, Vue, Svelte, Qwik, SolidJS, and React Native mean you are not locked into a single frontend framework.

Marketing team autonomy
Content and marketing teams can ship landing pages, campaign pages, and promotions independently, which frees up developer time for product work.
Structured and visual content modes
Builder.io supports both structured data models for developer-driven content and visual page building for marketing-driven content, giving teams flexibility in how they work.
Book a meeting with us to discuss how we can help or fill out a form to get in touch
Join the growing list of successful migrations
Case Study
View Case StudyMigrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform

Case Study
View Case StudyFrom Sanity overages to instantaneous publishing, we brought Mario Testino into the fast lane, and did it in style.

Case Study
View Case StudyHelping the UAE's most prolific Pay in 4 merchants scale their design system and composable infrastructure.

Case Study
View Case StudyHow we helped the fastest growing online cycling community, push the editorial velocity to new heights.
