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 Kontent.ai
We are the Builder.io to Kontent.ai 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 Developers on forums describe spending days trying to get basic integrations working because the docs are outdated or incomplete.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Outdated and incomplete documentation
Developers consistently report that the docs are confusing, outdated, or missing critical steps.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 Kontent.ai
Key advantages
Calling your CMS “Kontent dot ai” is a brilliant way to convince people you’ve built an AI-powered future. And to be fair, the platform does have a clean editor, strong workflow tools, and a respectable multi-channel setup.
It's perfect for the kind of company that has more infosec members than it does have devs. But calling yourself an AI platform doesn’t mean you’re built like one.
Real AI-driven CMS platforms start at the foundation with structured content, flexible modeling, real-time indexing, and an architecture that doesn’t panic the moment you try something complex. Sanity doesn’t even market itself as “AI-first,” but it’s been ahead of the curve for years. They shipped an embedding index before “AI CMS” was a pitch deck buzzword. We even built one of the first AI search tools on top of it.
So yes, Kontent.ai is great. If you want a polished interface and enterprise workflows, go for it. And if you’re dead-set on building your website there, talk to us first. We’ll walk you through it and maybe even find a better way before you spend six months discovering the limits yourself.
Intuitive content management
You shouldn’t need a week of onboarding to publish a paragraph. Kontent.ai nails this with a clean interface that doesn’t punish you for being a marketer instead of a developer.
Flexible content modeling
Build content the way your brain works. Modular, structured, reusable. No dev intervention every time marketing decides “we need one more field.”
Strong API-first architecture
The APIs are predictable, well-documented, and don’t require wild workarounds. Everything connects the way it should and developers stay happy too.
Tech stack integration
React, Vue, Angular, or whatever framework you’re obsessed with this week, Kontent.ai plays nice with all of them and keeps deployments smooth.
Advanced image transformations
You can resize, crop, and optimize visuals without leaving the CMS. Think of it as an in-house designer that doesn’t complain about aspect ratios.
Real-time collaboration
Writers, editors, and developers can work together without stepping on each other’s commits. Instant updates, fewer Slack messages, and zero “who overwrote my draft?” moments.
Common questions
Builder.io to Kontent.ai migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Builder.io to Kontent.ai 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 Kontent.ai cost?
Kontent.ai hides pricing behind a "book a demo" wall, which is never a good sign for budget planning. Based on what we've seen across client engagements, the Developer plan is free but extremely limited (1 user, 2 languages). The Scale plan starts around $1,249/month (billed annually), and Enterprise pricing goes higher depending on API usage, content items, and seats. The real cost is in implementation. Kontent.ai requires upfront developer time to set up content models, build a custom preview pipeline (there's no native live preview), and configure workflows. Budget 4-8 weeks of developer time for initial setup on top of the subscription cost.
Is Kontent.ai worth it compared to other enterprise headless CMS platforms?
Kontent.ai does enterprise content workflows well. The role-based permissions, multi-step approvals, and content scheduling are polished. The API is predictable and well-documented. Where it falls short is flexibility. The content modelling tools are competent but not as powerful as Sanity's, and the lack of a native preview system means your team needs to build and maintain custom preview infrastructure. At similar price points, Contentful offers a larger ecosystem and Sanity offers deeper customisation. We'd recommend Kontent.ai primarily for teams already invested in the Kentico ecosystem or organisations where workflow governance is the top priority over developer experience.
What happens to image URLs when you replace assets in Kontent.ai?
This is a genuine pain point. Every time you replace an image or file in Kontent.ai, the platform generates a completely new URL. That means any hardcoded references, cached versions, or external links to the old asset break instantly. For content teams publishing at scale, this creates a maintenance burden. You need to update every place the old URL was referenced, or accept broken images. Most CMS platforms handle asset replacement by keeping the same URL and invalidating the cache. Kontent.ai's approach feels like an oversight that hasn't been fixed. If you're managing hundreds of assets, this adds real friction to daily editorial work.
What's involved in migrating away from Kontent.ai?
The content extraction itself is clean. Kontent.ai's Delivery API and Management API let you pull content items and assets programmatically. The challenges are schema translation and workflow replication. Kontent.ai's content types map to their own structure, and converting those to another CMS's schema requires careful field-by-field mapping, especially for linked items and modular content. If you've built custom workflow states and approval chains, those need to be recreated in the target platform. Plan for 6-10 weeks depending on the number of content types, locales, and workflow complexity. The API rate limit of 100 requests per second can also slow down bulk exports for large content libraries.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
