Case study
View case studySlingshot Bio
Roboto converged Slingshot Bio's WordPress and Shopify sites into one headless Shopify build on Next.js and Sanity, instrumented end to end and AI-ready.
From Framer to Adobe Experience Manager
We are the Framer to Adobe Experience Manager migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Framer
Key pain points
Framer looks incredible until you ask it to behave like a real CMS. The moment you go beyond a tiny blog or a five-page marketing site, the cracks show fast.
The CMS is bare-bones, the editor eats half your screen. Let's not forget the slow previews, sticky panels, and random bugs that make you question your life choices.
And then there’s the pricing. Basic caps you at 2 collections, and the costs that bite aren't the headline plan price. They're the $20/month per editor, the $10/month content editors, and the $40 per language for localisation. The May 2026 changes cut editor seats but kept that per-language charge, which the community has not let go. Framer isn’t built for deep structures, complex logic, or anything resembling enterprise workflows. If you’re already knee-deep in a Framer setup and not sure whether to scale, switch, or salvage, reach out to us. We’ll help you figure out the smartest path forward (and save you from the pain).
Basic CMS
Framer’s CMS works for blogs and small sites, but anything bigger starts to feel cramped. If you are looking for complex structures, relationships, or enterprise-level content operations, you’ll hit the walls quickly.
Not built for serious eCommerce
It can handle a simple store, but anything custom, multi-variant, or large-scale becomes a hackathon. If you’re planning real eCommerce, you’ll want something sturdier.
Only friendly for designers
If you’ve never touched design tools, the UI has a learning curve, and there’s no deep tutorial to hold your hand. You’re on your own after the basics.
Limited advanced features
Things like user roles, workflows, or deep automation are difficult on Framer. Great for designers; less great for anyone who needs serious operational features.
Small plugin ecosystem
The community is growing, but nowhere near Webflow or mature CMS platforms. If you need niche integrations or extensions, expect roadblocks or custom work.
Not suited for complex or multi-language sites
As soon as you need structured data, heavy localisation, or custom code, Framer starts to feel restrictive. Headless CMS platforms handle this far better.
Benefits of Adobe Experience Manager
Key advantages
AEM is the kind of platform you only choose if you’re a Fortune 500 company or you enjoy voluntary suffering. I’m not an Adobe fan. It’s bloated, overpriced, and built to lock you into their ecosystem. But fine, here are the positives. The Adobe integration is the real draw. If your organisation already lives inside Creative Cloud, Analytics, and Target, AEM becomes a giant DXP monolith that handles assets, personalisation, segmentation, and multi-channel delivery from one place. The DAM is genuinely strong, now split into Assets Prime and Assets Ultimate tiers, and it scales to enormous traffic when you throw infrastructure at it.
If you’re not operating at scale, you’ll spend absurd money for problems a clean Sanity + modern composable stack solves better and cheaper. If you are considering AEM or escaping it, get in touch. We’ll help you choose something that won’t haunt your ops team for the next decade.
Integration with Adobe tools
AEM connects with Creative Cloud, Analytics, and Target, letting teams move assets, data, and personalisation logic across tools without friction
Robust digital asset management
The DAM is genuinely powerful. It has AI tagging, smart cropping, versioning, and bulk optimisation for massive media libraries.
Consistent multi-channel delivery
AEM can push content to web, mobile apps, email, and more from one central source. Ideal for enterprises that need consistent messaging across every customer touchpoint.
Flexible architecture
Runs headful, headless, or hybrid. Teams can serve Content Fragments over GraphQL, author on a live frontend with the Universal Editor, or ship through Edge Delivery Services, then mix that with legacy setups. Adaptable for companies with complicated stacks.
Scalable enterprise-level operations
AEM is designed to handle huge traffic, global teams, and heavy workflows. It scales reliably when backed by proper infrastructure and Adobe’s cloud.
Intuitive user interface
For an enterprise platform, the UI is relatively approachable, helping large content teams manage complex workflows without needing to touch code.
Common questions
Framer to Adobe Experience Manager migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Framer to Adobe Experience Manager migration
How much does Framer cost for a real website?
As of 2026, Framer's site plans are Free, Basic at $10/month, Pro at $30/month, and Scale at $100/month (Scale is annual only). The free plan won't carry a real site. You get a framer.site subdomain and Framer branding. A custom domain starts on Basic, which gives you 2 CMS collections and 30 pages. Pro lifts that to 10 collections, 150 pages, and 2,500 CMS items, and beyond 10 you pay roughly $40 per extra 10 collections. The other catch is the per-seat and add-on pricing. Editors are $20/month each, content editors $10/month, and localisation runs $40 per language. So a small marketing site with a blog and two editors lands around $50-$70/month, and a multi-language content site climbs faster than the sticker price suggests. Compare that to a headless CMS on a free tier plus roughly $20/month hosting on Vercel, and Framer stops looking cheap once your team or your content grows.
Can you move a Framer site to a headless CMS without losing the design?
Yes, and we've done this for several clients. The design itself translates well to a modern frontend because Framer sites are essentially CSS layouts with animations. We rebuild the visual design in Next.js (or whatever framework fits), which usually produces a faster, more performant version of the same site. CMS content exports from Framer's collections through their API, though the data structures are simple so the migration is straightforward. Animations need manual recreation using a library like Motion for React, but the results are typically better than Framer's output. The whole process takes 4-8 weeks for a typical marketing site.
What are the best alternatives to Framer for a growing company?
It depends on what you're outgrowing. If you want to keep the visual editing experience, Webflow offers more CMS depth and ecommerce capabilities, though it has its own scaling limitations. If you want full control, a headless CMS (Sanity is our pick) paired with Next.js gives you unlimited flexibility in content modelling, design, and performance. Builder.io is worth considering if your marketing team needs to build pages independently, though the vendor lock-in is a concern. For most growing companies, we recommend the headless CMS plus custom frontend route because it scales without platform ceilings and your design is never limited by what a visual builder supports.
When should you stop using Framer and switch to something else?
Three signals tell you it's time. First, your CMS needs exceed what collections can handle. If you need relational content, structured data beyond flat lists, or more than a handful of collection types, Framer's CMS will hold you back. Second, content editing. Framer has no separate admin for editors, so anyone updating the blog works inside the full design file, which is a real problem once non-designers are involved. Third, development workflows. If your team includes developers who want version control, CI/CD pipelines, and the ability to write custom logic, Framer's no-code environment becomes a constraint. We've migrated Framer sites for companies that hit these walls together, usually around the 20-30 page mark with three or more content types.
Does Framer support headless or API content delivery?
Not really. Framer renders and hosts your site on its own infrastructure, and the CMS is built to feed that frontend, not to serve content over an API to another app. There is a read API for pulling collection data out, which is enough for an export or a migration, but you can't point a separate Next.js or mobile app at Framer as a content backend the way you would with Sanity or Contentful. If you need one content source feeding a website, an app, and a few other surfaces, Framer is the wrong shape. A headless CMS is built for exactly that.
How much does Adobe Experience Manager cost?
AEM is one of the most expensive CMS platforms going. Adobe publishes no list prices, so everything is a custom enterprise quote. From contracts we've seen, AEM Sites licensing tends to start around $60,000 per year on its own, and a full AEM as a Cloud Service deployment usually lands in the six figures, often $200,000 or more annually once you factor in usage. Implementation runs another $100,000 to $500,000+, and Adobe support contracts add 15-25% of licensing on top. We've watched companies pay more for their AEM contract than for their entire engineering team's salaries. If that ratio sounds familiar, it's time to rethink the stack.
Can I migrate from AEM to Sanity?
Yes, and it's one of the more common moves we handle. The work is real but tractable. For an enterprise instance, plan for a few weeks to a few months depending on how customised AEM is. The biggest bottleneck is content extraction. AEM's JCR (Java Content Repository) stores everything in a proprietary node structure that needs custom tooling to export cleanly. Custom OSGi bundles, Sling models, and heavy DAM workflows all get rebuilt or replaced, usually with something far simpler. We run a parallel build, standing up Sanity and a modern frontend while AEM stays live, then cut over once content and redirects are validated. Editorial teams keep working throughout.
What are AEM's main limitations?
Cost is the headline, but it isn't the only one. Development is slow because nearly everything routes through Java, OSGi, and Sling, so even small changes need a dedicated dev. Performance degrades the moment you customise the platform. The author UI is dense, and routine content work often still depends on engineers. You're also tied to Adobe-certified partners for setup and upkeep, and contracts tend to carry multi-year lock-ins. The headless side (Content Fragments served over GraphQL, plus the Universal Editor) works, but it's bolted onto a DXP monolith rather than built lean from the start.
Is AEM overkill for most sites?
For most sites, yes. AEM earns its keep when an organisation already lives inside Creative Cloud, Analytics, and Target and needs governance across hundreds of properties. If you're not using several of those Adobe tools, you're paying enterprise rates for a CMS that's slower to build on and more expensive to staff than the alternatives. We've met teams who adopted AEM on a consultant's recommendation, then found they used maybe 15% of it. A Sanity backend with a Next.js frontend would have cost a fraction and shipped faster. Three things to watch if you do leave. DAM assets with custom metadata and renditions don't transfer automatically. Dispatcher and Sling URL patterns need careful redirect mapping to hold SEO value. Contract lock-ins can carry steep early-termination fees.
Get in touch
Tell us what you're building. We reply within one working day — Jono or someone on the team picks up every message personally.
