Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From ButterCMS to Tina CMS
We are the ButterCMS to Tina CMS migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with ButterCMS
Key pain points
Where ButterCMS starts to show cracks is when projects grow beyond its comfort zone. The content modeling is adequate for straightforward use cases, but it lacks the depth and flexibility of platforms like Sanity or Contentful. Components are only available for pages, not collections or blog posts, which creates frustrating inconsistencies when you're trying to build a cohesive content architecture. The 1,000 content field limit, even on expensive plans, can become a real ceiling for ambitious projects.
The platform's smaller ecosystem is a double-edged sword. While anyone who knows JavaScript can work with the API, you won't find the same depth of community resources, plugins, or third-party integrations that larger platforms offer. Media management is also noticeably behind, with no bulk upload capability and limited asset organisation tools. For agencies managing multiple client sites, these paper cuts add up quickly.
There have also been transparency concerns. In 2024, a DNS incident affected thousands of sites using ButterCMS, but their status page showed no downtime. That kind of communication gap is a red flag for any team relying on a third-party CMS in production. The pricing, while competitive on the surface, can feel steep for smaller teams once you move past the limited free tier, and the jump between plans isn't always proportional to what you get.
Limited content modeling flexibility
Components are only available for pages, not collections or blog posts. This creates awkward workarounds when you need consistent structured content across different content types.
Content field limits on all plans
Even the most expensive plans cap you at 1,000 content fields. For complex, multi-locale projects this ceiling arrives faster than you'd expect.
No bulk media upload
The media library only supports single-file uploads with limited organisation tools. Managing assets across a large site becomes tedious quickly.
Small ecosystem and community
Compared to Contentful or Sanity, the community is tiny. Fewer plugins, fewer tutorials, and fewer developers with direct experience means more problem-solving on your own.
Transparency concerns around incidents
In 2024, a DNS incident reportedly affected sites using ButterCMS, but limited public acknowledgement on their status page raised concerns about transparency. The details are difficult to verify independently.
Pricing jumps between tiers
The free tier is very limited, and paid plans start at $71 per month. For small projects or startups, the cost can be hard to justify when alternatives offer more generous free tiers.
Benefits of Tina CMS
Key advantages
Tina CMS has a genuinely compelling core idea: real-time visual editing backed by Git. Instead of your content living in some opaque database, every change becomes a Git commit. For developer teams that already live in Git, this feels natural. The local development workflow is solid too — you can iterate on schema and content simultaneously, merge everything in a single commit, and keep your content pipeline tightly coupled with your codebase. That's a meaningful advantage over CMS platforms that treat content as a completely separate concern.
The inline editing experience is where Tina really shines. Content editors can see their changes in context on the actual live site, which dramatically reduces the feedback loop between "I changed something" and "here's what it looks like." For marketing teams and content creators who are tired of editing fields in a dashboard and then previewing on a separate URL, this is a breath of fresh air. It bridges the gap between developer-friendly and editor-friendly in a way that most headless CMS platforms don't even attempt.
Since going fully open-source under Apache 2.0 and being acquired by SSW, the self-hosting story has improved significantly. You can run your own backend with your own database and auth, which gives you more control than relying on TinaCloud. If you're building a Next.js or React-based project and want a CMS that lives close to your code, Tina is worth serious consideration. If you want help evaluating whether Tina fits your stack, or you're looking at alternatives, we're happy to chat.
Real-time visual editing
Editors can make changes directly on the live site with instant visual feedback. This is genuinely one of the best inline editing experiences in the headless CMS space.
Git-backed content workflow
Every content change becomes a Git commit, so your content versioning, branching, and collaboration all flow through the same tools your developers already use.
Schema defined in code
Content models are defined in your codebase alongside your components, keeping your content structure and frontend tightly aligned and version-controlled.
Strong local development experience
You can develop locally with full CMS functionality, iterate on schema and content together, and push everything in a single commit. No cloud dependency during development.
Markdown and MDX support
Tina works natively with markdown and MDX files, making it a natural fit for documentation sites, blogs, and any project that already uses file-based content.
Fully open-source and self-hostable
The entire backend is open-source under Apache 2.0. You can self-host with your own database, auth, and Git provider, giving you full control over your content infrastructure.
Common questions
ButterCMS to Tina CMS migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about ButterCMS to Tina CMS migration
How do we migrate content out of ButterCMS?
ButterCMS has a clean REST API, so pulling your content is straightforward. Blog posts, pages, and collections all export as JSON through their API endpoints. The main complexity is restructuring component-based page content for your target CMS, since ButterCMS components only work on pages and don't map 1:1 to other platforms. Media assets need to be downloaded from their CDN and re-uploaded. For a typical blog-heavy site with 200 to 500 posts, we complete the migration in 2 to 4 weeks.
Why do teams leave ButterCMS?
Content modeling flexibility is the top reason. Once projects grow past simple blogs and marketing pages, the 1,000 content field limit becomes a real ceiling. Components being restricted to pages (not collections or blog posts) forces awkward workarounds. Teams also feel the ecosystem gap, with fewer plugins, integrations, and community resources compared to larger platforms. The 2024 DNS incident that wasn't reflected on their status page raised trust concerns for teams running production sites.
What does ButterCMS cost compared to alternatives?
ButterCMS paid plans start at $71/month after a limited free tier. Every plan includes unlimited users, which is genuinely competitive. But the pricing jumps between tiers aren't proportional to what you get, and the content field limits apply even on expensive plans. By comparison, Sanity's free tier includes 3 users with 500K API requests, and you only pay more as your usage scales. For teams outgrowing ButterCMS, the cost of migration typically pays for itself within 6 months through better tooling and fewer workarounds.
How do we migrate content out of Tina CMS?
Tina stores content as markdown and MDX files in your Git repository, which makes extraction the easiest part of any CMS migration we do. Your content is already files on disk. The work is in transforming those markdown files into the structured format your new CMS expects. Rich text blocks, custom components embedded in MDX, and frontmatter fields all need mapping. For a blog or docs site with 100 to 500 pages, we typically complete the migration in 2 to 4 weeks.
Why are teams leaving Tina CMS?
Three issues come up repeatedly. First, the React-only constraint for visual editing blocks teams that want to use Astro, SvelteKit, or other frameworks. Second, the development environment is unstable. The admin interface loads external assets that update independently of your codebase, so it can break without you changing anything. Third, the 2024 security breach involving compromised AWS keys shook confidence in the platform's operational maturity. Teams with enterprise compliance requirements found that hard to overlook.
Is it worth self-hosting Tina instead of migrating away?
Self-hosting removes the TinaCloud dependency, but it introduces its own gaps. There's no search functionality, no Git LFS support, and reference fields timeout on large collections. If you're already frustrated with Tina's instability, self-hosting adds more operational burden rather than solving the root problems. We've found that teams considering self-hosted Tina are usually better served by migrating to a platform with proper managed hosting and a more mature editorial experience.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
