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 Sitecore
We are the Hygraph to Sitecore 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 Sitecore
Key advantages
Sitecore is a full digital experience platform, not just a CMS. The personalisation engine, marketing automation, and XP analytics stack up well against Adobe Experience Manager, and for some Fortune 500s running global campaigns across dozens of channels, that's the right fit. Content management, email, testing, and customer data all live in one place, so large marketing teams don't have to stitch together five tools to run a campaign.
Its .NET foundation is the other draw for enterprises already deep in the Microsoft ecosystem. The platform scales, the personalisation actually works when properly configured, and the integration story with Azure, Dynamics, and Power BI is genuinely solid.
That said, we rarely recommend it outside the Fortune 500. If you're an enterprise already on Sitecore and wondering whether to stay or move, get in touch, we can give you an honest read.
Common questions
Hygraph to Sitecore migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Hygraph to Sitecore 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 Sitecore cost?
Sitecore doesn't publish pricing, but based on what we've seen across client projects, expect to pay six figures annually. Licensing alone typically starts around $40,000 to $65,000 per year for a basic XM setup, and jumps well past $100,000 once you add XP or XC modules. Factor in implementation (often $150,000 to $500,000+), hosting, and the specialised developers you'll need on retainer. For mid-sized companies, the total cost of ownership over three years can easily exceed $500,000. We've helped teams migrate off Sitecore and cut their annual platform spend by 60-80%.
How hard is it to migrate away from Sitecore?
It depends on how deep you are. A basic Sitecore XM site with standard content types can be migrated in 8-12 weeks. If you're using Sitecore's personalisation engine, custom pipelines, or XP analytics heavily, the timeline stretches to 3-6 months. The biggest pain points are content extraction (Sitecore stores content in a tree structure that doesn't map cleanly to other systems) and rebuilding any custom .NET components in a modern stack. Our team typically runs the migration in phases, starting with content export and schema mapping before touching the frontend.
Is Sitecore worth it for mid-sized companies?
No, not in most cases. Sitecore was built for large enterprises with dedicated IT teams and six-figure CMS budgets. Mid-sized companies consistently overpay for features they never use. The personalisation engine sits idle, the marketing automation goes untouched, and the team ends up using it as a glorified page editor. A headless CMS paired with a modern frontend framework gives you better performance, lower costs, and faster development cycles. We've moved multiple mid-sized companies off Sitecore onto leaner stacks and the feedback is always the same: they wish they'd done it sooner.
What are the best Sitecore alternatives for enterprise teams?
It depends on what you actually use Sitecore for. If you need structured content with real-time collaboration and flexible APIs, Sanity is our go-to recommendation. If your team is locked into the Adobe ecosystem, AEM is the obvious (expensive) alternative. For teams that want enterprise workflow controls without the Sitecore price tag, Contentful or Hygraph are worth evaluating. The key question is whether you genuinely need a monolithic DXP or whether a composable stack of best-in-class tools would serve you better. In our experience, composable wins almost every time.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
