Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From BaseHub to Payload
We are the BaseHub to Payload migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with BaseHub
Key pain points
BaseHub is one of those platforms that feels like it was built by a developer, for a developer, and at no point did anyone ask, “Won't marketers need to be able to edit on the go?” Once you’re inside, it’s tables inside tables inside tables, like a Russian doll but somehow less fun. And as we’ve said before, we genuinely appreciate good engineering… but BaseHub often feels like someone shipped the database schema and called it a CMS.
BaseHub is painful to use, in our opinion. Because the platform is still young, features sometimes glitch, real-time collaboration hiccups, and localization or migration workflows can get messy fast. Documentation gaps and unpredictable branching only add to the frustration. If you're determined to build on BaseHub, we can walk you through the safest path… or at least help you avoid the inevitable “why is this breaking again?” moments.
Occasional feature glitches
New features sometimes ship a bit wobbly, so expect the occasional “why is this suddenly broken?” moment.
Not yet enterprise-ready
It’s great for small teams, but big orgs will hit walls fast. Workflow maturity and stability just aren’t there yet.
Limited third-party integrations
If you rely on a rich ecosystem, BaseHub won’t meet you halfway. You’ll be wiring a lot of things yourself.
Localization support gaps
Multi-region content teams will feel the pain quickly as language handling still needs serious tightening.
API rate limiting constraints
Push it too hard and you’ll hit rate limits faster than you expect, which can block larger deployments.
Sporadic stability issues
Real-time collaboration and branching can hiccup under pressure, making scaling workflows frustrating.
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
BaseHub to Payload migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about BaseHub to Payload migration
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.
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 2024 also shifted priorities, 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
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
