Case study
View case studySlingshot Bio
Roboto converged Slingshot Bio's WordPress and Shopify sites into one headless Shopify build on Next.js and Sanity, instrumented end to end and AI-ready.
From KeystoneJS to Joomla
We are the KeystoneJS to Joomla migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with KeystoneJS
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.
Benefits of Joomla
Key advantages
Recommending Joomla in 2026 feels a bit like recommending Internet Explorer. But if you must use it, it does earn a few real points. The multilingual support is built in, so you run a five-language site without a pile of plugins. The access-control system is more detailed than most enterprise platforms, and the modular structure gives developers room to build complex, multi-section sites. If you have a big editorial team that needs genuinely granular permissions, Joomla holds up.
If you are set on Joomla and we cannot talk you out of it, we will point you to an agency that still happily ships heavy old templates. Or sit down with us for half an hour, and we will at least make sure you do not regret the journey.
Native multilingual support
Joomla ships with multilingual features baked in, so you don’t need a plugin graveyard just to run a site in five languages. It handles translations cleanly and is one of the few CMS platforms that gets this right out of the box.
Granular user permission system
Its ACL system is its biggest bragging right. You can lock down roles, workflows, and access rules with a level of control that most CMS platforms still envy.
Custom field capabilities
Joomla gives you solid flexibility with custom fields, letting you shape structured content without hacking together a dozen extensions. It’s powerful enough for complex layouts and multi-section content.
Active developer community
The community isn’t massive, but the people who are there are dedicated, technical, and still shipping useful extensions and documentation. If you're deep in Joomla land, it’s a lifeline.
Strong security foundation
Kept patched, Joomla is stable and the core team takes security seriously, with regular updates. The catch is the "kept patched" part. The 2026 JCE editor exploit hit sites that fell behind, so the upkeep is on you.
Modular architecture flexibility
Its module-based layout system lets you build multi-section portals, dashboards, and content-heavy sites without bending the platform backward. If you know what you're doing, it’s flexible enough to scale.
Common questions
KeystoneJS to Joomla migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about KeystoneJS to Joomla migration
What makes migrating from KeystoneJS difficult?
KeystoneJS stores data through Prisma, so the database layer is well-structured and easy to export. The harder part is replacing everything Keystone doesn't give you. Most Keystone projects have custom-built preview systems, publishing workflows, and access control logic that are tightly coupled to the Node.js backend. Rebuilding those features in a new CMS takes planning. We typically budget 4 to 8 weeks for a Keystone migration depending on how much custom infrastructure the team has built around it.
Why do teams move away from KeystoneJS?
Deployment complexity is the number one reason. Teams love Keystone during local development, then hit a wall getting it reliably into production. The Docker images can balloon past a gigabyte, the docs don't cover production hosting well, and there's no managed hosting option. The small community compounds this problem. When you hit an edge case, there are fewer people who've solved it before. Content editors also struggle with the admin UI, which lacks visual editing, live preview, and built-in publishing workflows that competing platforms ship by default.
How do we extract our content from KeystoneJS?
Since Keystone uses Prisma ORM, your content lives in standard PostgreSQL, MySQL, or SQLite tables with clean schemas. You can export directly from the database using SQL dumps or Prisma's query API. The content model is defined in your TypeScript codebase, so mapping fields to a new CMS is straightforward. We write automated scripts that handle the data transformation, including resolving relationships between lists and migrating file references. For a project with 20 to 50 Keystone lists, extraction and transformation usually takes 1 to 2 weeks.
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.
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.
