# Hygraph to Contentful migration > How to migrate from Hygraph to Contentful, with a side-by-side comparison and FAQs. --- ## Source: Hygraph - **Type:** headless - **Official site:** https://hygraph.com - **Pricing:** https://hygraph.com/pricing - **Last reviewed:** 2026-07-28 ## Key advantages Hygraph's GraphQL-first setup isn't a gimmick. Queries are precise, you only fetch what you need, and the schema is generated from your content model automatically. Content teams get a clean UI, and developers get proper typing out of the box. The standout feature is Content Federation: you can pull external REST or GraphQL APIs into Hygraph and query them alongside your content through a single endpoint. That replaces a lot of duct-taped backend glue. Workflows, localization, roles, and staging all come built in. If you're weighing it up (or trying to untangle an existing setup), talk to us, we've shipped several Hygraph builds and know where the edges are. ### GraphQL-first API architecture Hygraph gives developers precise and predictable queries without over-fetching or duct-taping endpoints. If you're comfortable with GraphQL, go ahead with it. ### Multi-region content delivery Your content gets served from the closest region, so pages load fast everywhere without you having to think about infrastructure. ### Fast geo-distributed responses Because their CDN actually does its job, API calls resolve quickly across regions which is perfect for apps that can’t afford to wait on slow round-trips. ### External API integration support Hygraph’s content federation lets you pull in data from other APIs and treat everything like one unified system without any custom backend glue or microservice jungle. ### Generous free tier offering You can build real projects without paying a penny. It’s surprisingly capable for prototyping, small sites, or testing before you commit budget. ### Automated webhook capabilities All the updates trigger instantly with clean webhooks, which is great for syncing builds, triggering workflows, or piping data into other systems without manual overhead. ## Key pain points GraphQL-only is the core trade-off. If your team hasn't worked with GraphQL, expect a ramp-up period, and simple projects can end up feeling more complex than they need to be. The UI slows down once your dataset grows, especially with dozens of fields or multiple locales. Localization works, but past ten languages the interface starts to feel like a spreadsheet that lost a fight. Integrations take more effort if the rest of your stack is REST. There's no REST endpoint, so you'll write adapters or a BFF layer. Pricing is the other thing to plan for. The Growth plan at $199/month includes 1M API operations, and metered overages stack up quickly on a busy site once you cross that line. Enterprise is the only way to unlock SSO, custom roles, and higher locale counts. If you're unsure whether Hygraph is the right fit, or you're stuck halfway up the learning curve, reach out. We can help you map the cleanest path forward. ### You have to really love GraphQL GraphQL is one of its strongest point but it can be your downfall as well, if your team hasn’t touched GraphQL before, expect a ramp-up period. It’s powerful but definitely not "plug in and go." ### Large dataset performance issues Once your project grows, the Hygraph UI can start dragging. Big data collections need extra optimization to stay usable. ### Interface sluggishness at scale Heavy models, long lists, and asset-heavy projects can make the dashboard feel slow, especially for editors. ### Localization workflow complexity Managing multiple locales works, but it’s not as intuitive as it looks on paper. Some teams find themselves clicking around more than expected. ### Multi-language interface clutter Multi-language setups work fine, but as soon as you hit double-digit locales, the UI quickly becomes noisy and harder to manage. It’s usable, just not optimised for scale. ### REST API integration challenges If your systems still rely on REST, be prepared for extra engineering. Hygraph is GraphQL-only, so adapters and rework are part of the deal. ## Target: Contentful - **Type:** headless - **Official site:** https://www.contentful.com - **Pricing:** https://www.contentful.com/pricing - **Last reviewed:** 2026-08-13 ## Key advantages Contentful is one of the most established headless CMS choices, and we still see plenty of customers land on it after a shortlist. It's built around structured content, so you model fields once and pull them into any front end you like. That means no copy-pasted components scattered across pages. It also has first-party support for A/B testing and personalization through its Studio add-on, which most competitors don't match natively. The app ecosystem covers SEO, translation, validation, and asset management, and editors get live side-by-side preview for content they're working on. If your team has the budget and the developer resources to model content properly, it's a solid pick. ### API-first design Contentful was built for APIs from day one, which means your content plugs cleanly into apps, websites, and mobile. ### Developer-friendly flexibility Schemas, content models, and references can be tuned however you like. If your stack is anything beyond "cookie-cutter," Contentful won’t get in your way. ### User-friendly interface Editors enjoy using it. Clean UI, quick search, structured fields, and no "where does this go again?" confusion. ### Extensive integration capabilities Plug in analytics, eCommerce, automation, and translation. Contentful plays nicely with almost anything. And if something isn’t supported yet, you can wire it up yourself without hacking the platform apart. ### Scales under traffic Contentful's global CDN holds up under heavy load. We've run it on sites pushing millions of monthly requests without needing bespoke infrastructure to handle spikes. ### Cloud-based architecture You don't have to install, patch, or maintain anything. It’s fast, globally distributed, and always up to date. Your content team can ship from anywhere without a DevOps babysitter. ## Key pain points Contentful is one of those platforms where the bill can catch you off guard. The free tier caps you at 25 content types and 100K API calls, and a single marketing site can blow past both without warning. The next step up is $300 a month, and enterprise pricing often lands in the $50K to $100K+ a year range. The pattern teams keep hitting is the same: the jump is forced by one limit, not by needing the bigger feature set. The content type cap alone can push you onto a higher plan you don't otherwise need. The other issue is that Contentful has strong opinions about how content should be modelled, and those opinions aren't always documented. Projects built without that knowledge tend to accumulate performance problems and awkward workarounds. Before writing Contentful off, speak to us, a lot of the pain we see is implementation, not platform. ### Pricing climbs fast Contentful isn't a cheap CMS. Once you pass the free tier's content type or API call limit, you're on the $300/month Lite plan, and enterprise pricing often starts at $50K+ a year. ### Complex for non-technical users Marketers and editors may need a small learning curve before they feel at home. It’s powerful but not always plug-and-play. ### Integration dependency A lot of magic happens through third-party tools. Great for flexibility, but it does mean extra setup instead of getting everything out-of-the-box. ### Limited native features Contentful keeps the core CMS clean and minimal, but that also means more building and configuring to get advanced functionality. ### Learning curve for new teams If your team is moving from a traditional CMS, expect some onboarding time. Structured content is amazing but new for many. ### Requires careful management Because it’s so flexible, projects need good governance. Without it, content models can get messy and harder to maintain over time. ## Frequently asked questions ### Is Hygraph easy for non-technical editors to use? It's decent but not great. Hygraph's editor UI is clean and approachable for basic content updates, but the moment your content model gets complex (nested components, multiple locales, lots of reference fields), editors start feeling overwhelmed. The interface slows down with large datasets, and the GraphQL-native approach means the editorial experience is shaped by developer decisions more than in other headless CMS platforms. We've set up Hygraph for teams where editors managed well after proper onboarding, but it requires more hand-holding than something like Sanity's Studio, which was designed with editorial experience as a first-class priority. ### What does Hygraph cost as you scale? Hygraph's Hobby plan is free with 3 seats, 1,000 content entries, 500K API operations, and 2 locales. The Growth plan is $199/month with 10 seats, 10,000 entries, 1M API operations, and 3 locales. Once you pass those limits, Growth charges automatic overages per block of API operations and per GB of asset traffic, so check the current rate on the pricing page before you sign. Enterprise is custom pricing and goes up to 200 seats, 1M+ entries, 50M+ API operations, and up to 80 locales, with SSO and custom roles on top. The catch is the same as it has always been. High-traffic sites burn through included operations fast, and Content Federation queries count against the limit too. Model your expected API usage before committing. ### What are Hygraph's main limitations? Three things come up on real projects. GraphQL is mandatory. There's no REST endpoint, so a REST-heavy stack means writing adapters or a BFF layer, and a team that hasn't used GraphQL faces a real ramp-up. The editor UI slows down as content grows. Big collections, dozens of fields, and double-digit locale counts make the dashboard sluggish for editors. And the paywall sits in awkward places. SSO, custom roles, and higher locale limits only arrive on Enterprise, so a mid-size team that wants proper access control jumps straight from $199/month to a sales call. None of these are dealbreakers if GraphQL is already your default and your content model stays disciplined, but they catch teams who picked Hygraph for the free tier and grew into the constraints. ### How does Hygraph compare to other headless CMS options? Hygraph's standout feature is Content Federation, which lets you pull data from external APIs into a unified GraphQL layer. That's genuinely useful if you're aggregating content from multiple sources. Compared to Contentful, Hygraph is cheaper at the lower tiers and more developer-friendly if your team already knows GraphQL. Compared to Sanity, Hygraph offers less flexibility in content modelling and lacks real-time collaboration in the editor. The free tier is generous for small projects. For larger builds, we usually recommend Sanity because the customisation ceiling is much higher and you're not locked into GraphQL as your only query language. ### Can I migrate from Hygraph to Sanity? Yes, and we do it regularly. Content extraction is the easy part since everything comes out through GraphQL queries. The bigger jobs are two. First, schema translation. Hygraph's content model maps to GraphQL types, and you rewrite those as Sanity schema definitions, then translate every GraphQL query into GROQ on the frontend. The mapping is mechanical once you've done it a few times, but it touches every page that fetches data. Second, rebuilding any Content Federation layer, because that logic lives inside Hygraph and doesn't export. If you've wired three or four external APIs through federation, you replicate those integrations in your application layer. We typically budget 4 to 8 weeks for a Hygraph to Sanity migration depending on content volume and how much federation you're untangling. ### How much does Contentful cost? Contentful has a Free tier with 10 users, 100K API calls per month, 25 content types, and 10,000 records. The Lite plan is $300/month for 20 users, 1M API calls, and 100GB CDN bandwidth. Enterprise is custom pricing with unlimited API calls and an uptime SLA of up to 99.99%. We've seen teams hit the free tier's API ceiling or content type cap fast, and the jump to Lite is often forced by a single limit rather than a feature need.