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 Uniform
We are the BaseHub to Uniform 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 Uniform
Key advantages
Uniform positions itself as a “composable DXP,” which is enterprise-speak for “it does a bit of everything on top of your actual CMS.” To be fair, the visual workspace is genuinely useful. Marketers get drag-and-drop control, personalization, and A/B testing without pinging developers every five minutes. And if you’re already juggling multiple systems (CMS, commerce, DAM), the orchestration layer can tidy up the chaos.
That said… we’ll be honest, we don’t really build with DXPs like this anymore. Whenever a headless tool starts shouting “DXP” from the homepage, it usually means heavyweight architecture, unnecessary complexity, and a bill only Fortune 500 companies would smile at. If you’re considering it anyway, feel free to get in touch. We’ll happily walk you through better, modern alternatives before you sink a quarter’s budget into something you probably don’t need.
Visual experience composition
Uniform’s visual builder lets marketers piece together pages without pinging developers every 5 minutes. It’s basically a drag-and-drop layer on top of your headless stack.
Multi-source content federation
Uniform pulls content from multiple CMSs, DAMs, and commerce tools into one interface, so you don’t need 10 tabs open to build a single page
Real-time collaboration tools
Teams can edit, plan, and experiment together without overwriting each other’s work. It’s built for big organisations where ten people touching the same page is a weekly occurrence.
Enterprise-grade scalability
Uniform is built to handle traffic spikes and heavy personalisation workloads. It’s overkill for small sites but a safe bet for enterprises terrified of a Black Friday outage.
Omnichannel content management
You can pipe the same content across web, apps, and any other channel marketing dreams up. Useful for brands juggling multiple experiences without wanting to rebuild the same page three times.
Built-in A/B testing
Uniform ships with native testing and targeting, so teams can experiment without gluing together half a dozen tools. It’s marketer-friendly and fast.
Common questions
BaseHub to Uniform migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about BaseHub to Uniform 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 do we migrate away from Uniform?
Uniform is an orchestration layer, not a traditional CMS, so migration means detangling it from the systems it sits on top of. Your actual content likely lives in a separate CMS, DAM, or commerce platform. The Uniform-specific parts, including composition layouts, personalisation rules, and A/B test configurations, need to be rebuilt in your target platform or replaced with dedicated tools. We typically spend 2 to 4 weeks on Uniform-specific teardown, on top of whatever migration the underlying content sources require.
Why do teams leave Uniform?
The price-to-value ratio is the most common complaint. Uniform's enterprise pricing is steep, and teams find they're paying premium rates for an abstraction layer that adds complexity rather than removing it. The learning curve is real. Teams consistently need weeks of onboarding to become productive, and the orchestration model introduces debugging overhead that frustrates both developers and content editors. When the contract comes up for renewal, many teams conclude they'd be better served by a simpler architecture.
Do we actually need a DXP like Uniform?
Probably not. We've worked with teams that adopted Uniform because they were managing content across 4 or 5 different systems and wanted a single editing interface. In practice, most of those teams would have been better off consolidating into one strong headless CMS and using it as the single source of truth. The "composable DXP" pitch sounds good in a sales deck, but it often means you're paying enterprise prices to glue together tools that could be replaced by a cleaner architecture. We're happy to audit your stack and give you an honest answer.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
