KeystoneJS logo
Sitecore logo

From KeystoneJS to Sitecore

We are the KeystoneJS to Sitecore 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.

Help me migrate


Deployment complexity in KeystoneJS

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 in KeystoneJS

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 in KeystoneJS

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.

Dated admin UI in KeystoneJS

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 in KeystoneJS

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 challenges in KeystoneJS

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 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

KeystoneJS to Sitecore migration FAQs

Answers to the most common questions about KeystoneJS to Sitecore 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.
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