Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From Builder.io to Joomla
We are the Builder.io to Joomla migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Builder.io
Key pain points
Builder.io looks impressive in demos but the reality of day-to-day usage tells a different story. The editor can be laggy, especially with more than 30 components on a page, and we have seen reports of outright crashes that lose unsaved work. The documentation is a persistent sore point. Developers on forums describe spending days trying to get basic integrations working because the docs are outdated or incomplete. For an agency setting up projects for clients, unreliable documentation means unpredictable timelines.
Pricing is another area where Builder.io catches teams off guard. The free tier exists but is quite limited, and costs ramp up quickly once you need features like roles, scheduling, or higher usage limits. We have seen complaints from freelancers and small teams about unexpected charges and slow support response times when trying to resolve billing issues. The lack of self-hosting is also a hard blocker for some clients with strict data residency requirements.
The biggest concern from our perspective is vendor lock-in. Builder.io's SDKs are deeply embedded in your frontend code, and if you ever need to migrate away, you are essentially rebuilding your page composition layer from scratch. There is also no real-time collaboration, so two editors working on the same page can overwrite each other's changes without warning.
Editor performance and stability
The visual editor becomes laggy with complex pages and has been reported to crash, losing unsaved work. Teams with content-heavy pages will feel this friction daily.
Outdated and incomplete documentation
Developers consistently report that the docs are confusing, outdated, or missing critical steps. Getting started takes far longer than it should for a tool that sells itself on speed.
Vendor lock-in risk
Builder.io's SDKs are tightly coupled to your frontend. Migrating away means rebuilding your entire page building and composition layer from scratch.
Limited collaboration tools
Builder.io now offers branching and peer review workflows in its Fusion product, but true real-time co-editing is still missing. Editors working outside of the Projects workflow can still overwrite each other's changes.
Pricing escalation
Costs ramp up quickly beyond the free tier, and teams report unexpected charges. Basic features like roles and scheduling sit behind higher-priced plans.
Slow and unresponsive support
Multiple users report delayed support responses, unresolved tickets, and difficulty getting refunds or cancellations processed in a reasonable timeframe.
Benefits of Joomla
Key advantages
Trying to convince someone to use Joomla in 2026 feels like recommending Internet Explorer. But hey, if you must use it, there are a few redeeming qualities. Joomla does have some genuinely solid features. Native multilingual support without plugins is impressive. Its permission system is more detailed than most enterprise platforms, and the modular structure gives developers a lot of freedom to architect complex, multi-section sites. If you've got a big team with lots of editors and need granular control, Joomla won't fall apart on you.
If you’re absolutely set on Joomla (and we can’t stop you), we’ll point you toward an agency that still proudly builds 2008-core-web-vital-failing templates. Or you can talk to us, and we’ll at least make sure you don’t regret every step of the journey.
Native multilingual support
Joomla ships with multilingual features baked in, so you don’t need a plugin graveyard just to run a site in five languages. It handles translations cleanly and is genuinely one of the few CMSs that gets this right out of the box.
Granular user permission system
Its ACL system is its biggest bragging right. You can lock down roles, workflows, and access rules with a level of control that most CMS platforms still envy.
Custom field capabilities
Joomla gives you solid flexibility with custom fields, letting you shape structured content without hacking together a dozen extensions. It’s powerful enough for complex layouts and multi-section content.
Active developer community
The community isn’t massive, but the people who are there are dedicated, technical, and still shipping useful extensions and documentation. If you're deep in Joomla land, it’s a lifeline.
Strong security foundation
When properly maintained, Joomla is known for being stable and secure. Regular updates and a security-focused core give it an edge over many older open-source CMS setups.
Modular architecture flexibility
Its module-based layout system lets you build multi-section portals, dashboards, and content-heavy sites without bending the platform backward. If you know what you're doing, it’s flexible enough to scale.
Common questions
Builder.io to Joomla migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Builder.io to Joomla migration
Can you migrate from Builder.io without losing your page designs?
Yes, but it takes work. Builder.io's visual editor stores page compositions as JSON that references your registered components. Those component registrations are tightly coupled to Builder's SDK, so you can't just export and import elsewhere. What you can preserve is the design itself. We extract the page structures, map them to equivalent components in the new system, and rebuild the composition layer. The visual output stays the same. Typical timeline is 6-10 weeks depending on how many page types and custom components are involved. The biggest time sink is usually recreating A/B test variants and personalisation rules that lived inside Builder's platform.
What does Builder.io actually cost?
Builder.io's free tier gives you 1 user and basic features, which is enough to evaluate but not to run a real project. The Growth plan starts at $49/month and includes more seats and content types. Beyond that, pricing gets opaque. Teams needing roles, scheduling, and higher API limits are pushed toward custom Enterprise plans that typically start in the $500-$1,000/month range. We've heard from freelancers and small agencies who were caught off guard by charges after exceeding limits on the Growth plan. Builder.io also charges per "impression" on higher tiers, which means your costs scale with traffic in ways that aren't always predictable.
How does Builder.io compare to a traditional headless CMS?
Builder.io is a visual page builder first and a CMS second. That distinction matters. If your primary goal is letting marketing teams build landing pages without developer involvement, Builder.io does that well. If you need structured content modelling, editorial workflows, multi-language support, or content that powers more than just web pages, a traditional headless CMS is a better fit. Builder.io's SDK embeds deeply into your frontend code, which creates vendor lock-in that most headless CMS platforms avoid. We typically recommend Builder.io only when the use case is narrow: high-volume landing page creation for marketing teams. For everything else, a headless CMS with a proper content model gives you more flexibility long-term.
What's the main risk of building on Builder.io?
Vendor lock-in. Builder.io's SDKs are woven into your component rendering layer, which means migrating away requires rebuilding how your pages are composed and rendered. That's not a content migration, it's an architecture migration. With a typical headless CMS, your content is accessible through standard APIs and your frontend is independent. With Builder.io, the two are intertwined. We've worked with teams who spent months extracting themselves from Builder.io because every page template needed to be recreated outside the platform. If you're evaluating Builder.io, go in with eyes open about the exit cost.
How much does it cost to migrate from Joomla to a modern CMS?
For a typical Joomla site with 500 to 2,000 pages, expect $15,000 to $60,000 depending on complexity. The content extraction itself is manageable since Joomla uses MySQL, but the real cost is rebuilding custom extensions, templates, and workflows in a modern stack. Most Joomla sites have accumulated years of plugins that need equivalents or replacements. We've found the migration typically pays for itself within 12 months through reduced hosting costs, faster page loads, and eliminated maintenance overhead from outdated PHP dependencies.
How long does a Joomla migration take?
Plan for 6 to 12 weeks for a full migration. Content extraction from Joomla's MySQL database takes a few days. The bulk of the timeline goes toward rebuilding your frontend, replacing extension functionality, and migrating SEO equity (URLs, redirects, metadata). Joomla's version upgrade issues actually work in your favour here. If upgrading between Joomla versions already means a near-rebuild, you might as well migrate to a platform that won't put you through the same pain again in 3 years. We handle the full process including 301 redirect mapping so you don't lose search rankings.
Why are companies finally leaving Joomla?
Performance and developer availability. Joomla sites on shared hosting consistently score poorly on Core Web Vitals, which directly hurts search rankings. Finding developers who still want to work with Joomla's older PHP conventions is getting harder and more expensive every year. The extension ecosystem is shrinking as maintainers move on to other platforms. Companies that delayed migration are now facing a compounding problem where the longer they wait, the fewer resources exist to help them. High cost-per-click on "Joomla migration" search terms tells you everything about how urgently companies want out.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
