Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From Kontent.ai to Uniform
We are the Kontent.ai to Uniform migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Kontent.ai
Key pain points
We've always been known to talk trash about WordPress, Framer and especially Prismic. It's fun and theraputic but truth be told Kontent.ai deserves it's fair share of aggro.
Pricing is hidden behind “book a demo” and their vague "price calculator". Basic features require developer elbow grease, and replacing a single image gives you a brand-new URL like it’s 2009. At scale, the API rate limits and bare-bones taxonomy start to feel less “enterprise” and more “please slow down, you’re scaring the CMS.”
If you’re absolutely set on using Kontent.ai, give us a shout. We’ll try to make it work… or find you something that won’t make your content team cry into their spreadsheets.
Hidden pricing model
Kontent.ai loves a “contact sales” button. Great if you're an enterprise with a procurement department, not so great if you're just trying to budget a project. Until you get a quote, you’re basically guessing.
Complex initial setup requirements
The platform is polished, but the setup isn’t plug-and-play. Getting projects wired correctly, especially when it comes to multi-channel setup, usually requires a developer, documentation, and a quiet room to scream into.
Missing out-of-box preview system
Unlike most modern CMS platforms, there's no native live preview. You have to build a custom preview pipeline, which adds effort, cost, and another item to the dev team’s already depressing backlog.
Asset replacement URL issues
Swap an image or file, and Kontent.ai generates a new URL, which means link rot and cleanup duties no one asked for. Publishing teams feel this pain the fastest.
API rate limiting constraints
API-first is great until you hit the rate limit. 100 requests per second is fine for small sites, but high-traffic apps need careful caching or extra infrastructure to avoid bottlenecks
Limited Management API coverage
The Management API doesn’t expose every UI action, so automation hits a ceiling. Some tasks still require clicking through the interface, which defeats half the point of going headless.
Benefits of Uniform
Key advantages
Uniform positions itself as a “composable DXP,” which is enterprise-speak for “it does a bit of everything on top of your actual CMS.” To be fair, the visual workspace is genuinely useful. Marketers get drag-and-drop control, personalization, and A/B testing without pinging developers every five minutes. And if you’re already juggling multiple systems (CMS, commerce, DAM), the orchestration layer can tidy up the chaos.
That said… we’ll be honest, we don’t really build with DXPs like this anymore. Whenever a headless tool starts shouting “DXP” from the homepage, it usually means heavyweight architecture, unnecessary complexity, and a bill only Fortune 500 companies would smile at. If you’re considering it anyway, feel free to get in touch. We’ll happily walk you through better, modern alternatives before you sink a quarter’s budget into something you probably don’t need.
Visual experience composition
Uniform’s visual builder lets marketers piece together pages without pinging developers every 5 minutes. It’s basically a drag-and-drop layer on top of your headless stack.
Multi-source content federation
Uniform pulls content from multiple CMSs, DAMs, and commerce tools into one interface, so you don’t need 10 tabs open to build a single page
Real-time collaboration tools
Teams can edit, plan, and experiment together without overwriting each other’s work. It’s built for big organisations where ten people touching the same page is a weekly occurrence.
Enterprise-grade scalability
Uniform is built to handle traffic spikes and heavy personalisation workloads. It’s overkill for small sites but a safe bet for enterprises terrified of a Black Friday outage.
Omnichannel content management
You can pipe the same content across web, apps, and any other channel marketing dreams up. Useful for brands juggling multiple experiences without wanting to rebuild the same page three times.
Built-in A/B testing
Uniform ships with native testing and targeting, so teams can experiment without gluing together half a dozen tools. It’s marketer-friendly and fast.
Common questions
Kontent.ai to Uniform migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Kontent.ai to Uniform migration
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.
How do we migrate away from Uniform?
Uniform is an orchestration layer, not a traditional CMS, so migration means detangling it from the systems it sits on top of. Your actual content likely lives in a separate CMS, DAM, or commerce platform. The Uniform-specific parts, including composition layouts, personalisation rules, and A/B test configurations, need to be rebuilt in your target platform or replaced with dedicated tools. We typically spend 2 to 4 weeks on Uniform-specific teardown, on top of whatever migration the underlying content sources require.
Why do teams leave Uniform?
The price-to-value ratio is the most common complaint. Uniform's enterprise pricing is steep, and teams find they're paying premium rates for an abstraction layer that adds complexity rather than removing it. The learning curve is real. Teams consistently need weeks of onboarding to become productive, and the orchestration model introduces debugging overhead that frustrates both developers and content editors. When the contract comes up for renewal, many teams conclude they'd be better served by a simpler architecture.
Do we actually need a DXP like Uniform?
Probably not. We've worked with teams that adopted Uniform because they were managing content across 4 or 5 different systems and wanted a single editing interface. In practice, most of those teams would have been better off consolidating into one strong headless CMS and using it as the single source of truth. The "composable DXP" pitch sounds good in a sales deck, but it often means you're paying enterprise prices to glue together tools that could be replaced by a cleaner architecture. We're happy to audit your stack and give you an honest answer.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
