Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From Hygraph to Kontent.ai
We are the Hygraph to Kontent.ai migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Hygraph
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 overages at $0.20 per 10K ops add up on a busy site. 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.
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
Hygraph to Kontent.ai migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Hygraph to Kontent.ai migration
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.
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.
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. Overages on Growth are $0.20 per 10,000 API operations. Enterprise is custom pricing and typically unlocks 200+ seats, 1M+ entries, 50M+ API operations, up to 80 locales, plus SSO and dedicated infrastructure. The catch is the same as it has always been, high-traffic sites burn through included operations fast, and Content Federation queries count against your limits too. Model your expected API usage before committing.
What's the hardest part of migrating from Hygraph?
Content extraction is actually straightforward since everything comes out through GraphQL queries. The harder part is rebuilding whatever Content Federation layer you've set up, because that logic lives inside Hygraph and doesn't export. If you've wired up three or four external APIs through federation, you'll need to replicate those integrations in your application layer. The other pain point is schema translation. Hygraph's content model maps to GraphQL types, and converting those to another CMS's schema (especially one that uses GROQ or REST) takes careful planning. We typically budget 4-8 weeks for a Hygraph migration depending on content volume and federation complexity.
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
