Skip to content
Joomla logo
Sitecore logo

From Joomla to Sitecore

We are the Joomla to Sitecore migration experts

Last verified:

Challenges with Joomla

Key pain points

Joomla sits in the same bracket as WordPress, except it is somehow even harder to explain to anyone under 40. If your C-suite still thinks “PHP developer” is a personality type, Joomla will make them feel right at home. You will also keep your hosting provider happy, because nothing about this platform is light or low-maintenance.

The dev experience feels stuck in a pre-Composer, pre-type-hints era. Major upgrades are the real horror story. Joomla 3 and 4 both went end of life in October 2025, and moving up a major version tends to break extensions and templates badly enough that you rebuild the site anyway. The community is smaller than WordPress's, the documentation is hit-and-miss, and the admin panel feels like a government portal that accidentally became a CMS. Performance on shared hosting is shaky and the editing workflow is clunky. If you really, truly still want Joomla, we will point you to another agency, or sit down with us for half an hour and we will talk you out of your biggest digital regret.

Help me migrate
Steep learning curve

Steep learning curve

Joomla makes even simple tasks feel like you’re onboarding into a new corporate ERP system. If you’re not already fluent in its quirks, prepare to lose a weekend (or three).

Outdated coding standards

Outdated coding standards

Still clinging to older PHP conventions, missing modern practices, and generally stuck in a time capsule. If you enjoy fighting your own tools, you’ll love it.

Complex migration process

Complex migration process

Upgrading versions feels less like an update and more like a full-blown rebuild. Random extensions break, templates combust, and you’re left questioning your career choices.

Extension compatibility issues

Extension compatibility issues

Half the ecosystem works… depending on your version, your template, the time of day, and whether Mercury is in retrograde. Reliability is not its strong suit.

Limited template selection

Limited template selection

Unless you’re aiming for “government website from 2011,” the design ecosystem doesn’t give you much to work with.

Interface complexity barriers

Interface complexity barriers

The admin panel still feels like an escape room puzzle. Everything is technically there, but actually finding or using it is another story.

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.

Start my migration

Common questions

Joomla to Sitecore migration FAQs

Answers to the most common questions about Joomla to Sitecore migration

Is Joomla free?
Yes. Joomla is open-source software under the GPL, so there is no licence fee and you can download Joomla 6 and self-host it for nothing. The real cost is everything around it. You pay for hosting, for any commercial extensions and templates you bring in, and for the developer time that keeps it patched and upgraded. Treat the price tag as hosting plus extensions plus maintenance, not a SaaS subscription. On a busy site those running costs add up fast, which is the part most "Joomla is free" claims quietly skip.
Can I migrate from Joomla to Sanity?
Yes, and it tends to be cleaner than a Joomla version upgrade. Joomla stores everything in MySQL, so we script the content extraction, map your articles, categories, and custom fields into a Sanity content model, and rebuild the frontend in Next.js. For a typical site of 500 to 2,000 pages, budget 6 to 12 weeks. The extraction takes a few days. The rest goes on the new frontend, replacing whatever your extensions used to do, and mapping 301 redirects so you keep your search rankings. The payoff is no more PHP version juggling and no near-rebuild every time the platform bumps a major version.
What are Joomla's main limitations?
Three things bite. First, major upgrades are brutal. Joomla 3 and 4 both reached end of life in October 2025, so anyone still on them is running unpatched software, and moving up a major version often breaks extensions and templates badly enough to feel like a rebuild. Second, the extension and template ecosystem is small next to WordPress, and maintainers keep drifting away. Third, the developer experience is dated and the admin panel is hard to navigate, so editor productivity suffers. Security upkeep is on you too, as the JCE editor exploit doing the rounds in 2026 reminded plenty of sites.
Joomla vs WordPress vs headless, which should I pick?
For a content site you want to keep cheap and simple, WordPress wins on ecosystem size and the sheer number of developers who know it. Joomla's honest edges are native multilingual and its access-control system, so it makes sense if you genuinely need granular permissions across a big editorial team. But both are PHP monoliths that tie your content to your frontend. If you care about performance, want a modern build with React or Next.js, and plan to push content to a web app, a mobile app, and a few other places at once, go headless. We pair Sanity with Next.js for exactly that, and it is where most teams leaving Joomla end up.
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

Tell us what you're building. We reply within one working day — Jono or someone on the team picks up every message personally.