# Framer to KeystoneJS migration > How to migrate from Framer to KeystoneJS, with a side-by-side comparison and FAQs. --- ## Source: Framer - **Type:** headless - **Official site:** https://www.framer.com - **Pricing:** https://www.framer.com/pricing - **Last reviewed:** 2026-07-28 ## Key advantages If you live in Figma all day, Framer is the right choice for you. You can import your layouts, tweak a few interactions, hit publish, and suddenly you’ve "built a website" without ever opening VS Code. The no-code editor is fast, the animations look like you actually care about UI, and the built-in hosting + global CDN means you never have to touch a server or pretend you know what an SSL certificate is. Multiple people can jump in, rewrite copy, adjust layouts, and preview the site instantly in real time with zero handoff pain, and "can you push this to staging?" nonsense. The SEO defaults are strong, images automatically behave, and performance is fast without you having to obsess over Lighthouse scores. Can't knock the service, but we're here when you're looking to build something more scalable. ### Ability to control layout with drag and drop You can drag, drop, and publish without the need for any developer or having experience in website development. With Framer, you can easily turn your mockup into a working page. ### Quick and cheap to build something If you need a site yesterday (and on a budget), go ahead with Framer. You can go from a Figma-level idea to a live marketing page in a few hours without writing any code or having developers wait on stand-ups. ### Some optimization comes by default Framer quietly handles things like image compression, semantic markup, and basic SEO hygiene. You ship quickly, and the site doesn't fall apart in Lighthouse analyses. ### Huge library of themes You can pick a template, tweak a few components, and you’re basically done. Its theme library is stacked, and most of it looks "portfolio ready" right out of the box. ### Real-time team collaboration Multiple people can jump in, edit, comment, and tweak designs live like Figma. It speeds up feedback loops and kills the endless back-and-forth. ### Intuitive, designer-friendly UI If you know your way around Figma, you’ll be able to use Framer without any difficulty. Framer’s interface is simple, and keeps designers moving without begging a developer for help. ## 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 $20 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. ## Target: KeystoneJS - **Type:** headless - **Official site:** https://keystonejs.com - **Last reviewed:** 2026-07-28 ## Key advantages KeystoneJS is one of those tools that really clicks if your team thinks in code. It's a schema-driven, open-source headless CMS built on Node.js, and the developer experience is genuinely good. You define your content models in TypeScript, Keystone generates a GraphQL API and an admin UI for you, and you're off. There's very little magic or abstraction hiding what's happening under the hood, which we appreciate when building complex projects for clients. The Prisma ORM integration is a real highlight. Automatic migration generation, type-safe database access, and support for PostgreSQL, MySQL, and SQLite mean you're not fighting your data layer. If you've ever had to wrangle a CMS into supporting a non-trivial relational content model, you'll understand why this matters. Keystone lets you express those relationships cleanly and query them with a proper GraphQL API. The document field editor is also worth mentioning. It's one of the more thoughtful rich text implementations we've seen in a headless CMS. You can embed custom React components directly into the editor, which means content teams can work with your actual design system components rather than generic blocks. For teams that care about structured content, Keystone gives you real tools to enforce it. Where Keystone really shines is in projects where the development team wants full ownership of the stack. There's no vendor lock-in, no proprietary query language, and no surprise pricing tiers. If you want a CMS that feels like a well-designed library rather than a platform, Keystone delivers on that promise. ### Schema-as-code with full TypeScript support Define your entire content model in TypeScript with strong type inference throughout. The schema drives everything from the database to the admin UI to the GraphQL API. ### Automatic GraphQL API generation Every content type you define automatically gets a full CRUD GraphQL API with filtering, pagination, and relationship resolution. No manual endpoint wiring needed. ### Prisma-powered database layer Built on Prisma ORM with automatic migration generation and type-safe queries. Supports PostgreSQL, MySQL, and SQLite out of the box. ### Flexible document field editor The rich text editor supports custom embedded components that map to your design system, giving content editors structured authoring without sacrificing flexibility. ### Granular access control Fine-grained, field-level access control defined in code. You can write custom logic for create, read, update, and delete operations per field or per list. ### Fully open source with no vendor lock-in MIT licensed with no paid tiers or proprietary features gated behind a subscription. You own the entire stack and can host it wherever you want. ## Key pain points The biggest challenge with KeystoneJS is that it hands you all the responsibility that a managed CMS would normally handle. Deployment is entirely on you, and the documentation around production hosting, Docker configuration, and scaling is thin. We've seen teams struggle to go from a smooth local development experience to a reliable production setup, especially if they don't have dedicated DevOps support. The admin UI Docker image alone can balloon to over a gigabyte, which is a headache for containerised deployments. The community around Keystone is significantly smaller than competitors like Strapi or Payload. That means fewer tutorials, fewer plugins, and slower answers when you hit an edge case. The ecosystem of ready-made integrations is almost non-existent, so you'll be building most things from scratch. For an agency working on client projects with deadlines, that time cost adds up quickly. Content editors also tend to have a harder time with Keystone compared to more polished alternatives. The admin UI is functional but feels utilitarian, and non-technical users often need more onboarding than you'd expect. There's no visual editing, no preview infrastructure, and no real content workflow features like drafts, publishing schedules, or approval chains without building them yourself. If your client's content team needs a CMS they can pick up and run with, Keystone usually isn't the answer. ### Deployment complexity Self-hosting is the only option, and the docs don't hold your hand. Getting Keystone into production requires real infrastructure knowledge, and the large Docker image sizes make it worse. ### Small community and ecosystem Compared to Strapi or even Payload, the community is much smaller. Fewer plugins, fewer tutorials, and slower support when things go wrong. ### No built-in content workflows There are no turnkey drafts, scheduled publishing, or approval chains. Keystone provides field primitives that can be assembled into publishing workflows, but you need to wire them up yourself. ### Admin UI feels dated The admin panel is functional but lacks the polish and UX of modern CMS interfaces. Non-technical editors often find it confusing and need more training. ### No visual editing or live preview There's no way for editors to see content in context before publishing. You'd need to build your own preview infrastructure, which is a significant engineering effort. ### Scaling requires significant effort Running Keystone under high traffic means managing session stores, reverse proxies, and server resources yourself. It doesn't scale as smoothly as cloud-native CMS alternatives. ## Frequently asked questions ### 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 Framer cost for a real website? As of 2026, Framer's site plans are Free, Basic at $10/month, Pro at $30/month, and Enterprise (custom pricing). 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 $20 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.