Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From Prismic to Builder.io
We are the Prismic to Builder.io migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Prismic
Key pain points
We have a long history with Prismic, and at one point, we were agency partners, so count us as biased. However, if you're anything like us, we've had an absolutely terrible experience with Prismic.
They've historically changed their API ad hoc, resulting in many broken websites, which is especially bad for an agency. They've dumped infrastructure on the community, resulting in expensive migration bills and client dissatisfaction and they've updated their system with no way to migrate other than to rebuild your entire website for literally years.
If you're having a hell of a time, we can help you move away and do it without breakages. We've had to migrate quite a few folks and we have a standardised process that lets us migrate images, videos, text and content structure to the platform of your choice.
Dependency on third-party hosting
You don’t control the infrastructure, Prismic does. So you’re tied to their uptime, limits, and CDN behaviour.
Limited native integrations
Most serious integrations require extra tooling or custom code because Prismic’s built-in ecosystem is pretty thin.
Steep learning curve
Slices, custom types, and the editor workflow take time to understand, especially for teams new to component-driven CMS structures.
Lack of built-in versioning
There’s no full document history or global rollback, meaning mistakes are harder to recover from without workarounds.
Escalating pricing model
Costs jump fast as you add seats, locales, or repositories, making it expensive to scale a growing content team.
Limited out-of-box features
Beyond basic content creation, most advanced needs require custom development, external tools, or plugins.
Benefits of Builder.io
Key advantages
Builder.io occupies a unique spot in the headless CMS landscape. It is not really a traditional headless CMS in the way that Sanity or Contentful are. It is more of a visual page builder with headless capabilities bolted on. That distinction matters because if your marketing team needs to ship landing pages fast without filing Jira tickets, Builder.io genuinely delivers on that promise. The drag-and-drop editor is solid, and the ability to register your own React components so that non-developers can compose pages from your actual design system is a legitimately powerful idea.
Where Builder.io really shines is in bridging the gap between developers and marketing teams. You build the components, register them with Builder, and then hand the keys over. Marketers can assemble pages, run A/B tests, and publish without touching code. For agencies like ours, this means fewer "can you just move this banner" tickets and more time spent on actual engineering work.
The framework support is also genuinely broad. Next.js, React, Angular, Vue, Svelte, Qwik, SolidJS, and React Native all have SDKs. If you are running a modern JavaScript stack, Builder.io probably has an integration for it. The AI features they have been shipping are interesting too, though still early days in terms of real production reliability.
Visual drag-and-drop editor
The visual editor lets non-technical users build and edit pages using your actual codebase components. It is one of the better implementations of visual editing in the headless space.
Custom component registration
Developers can register their own React, Vue, or Angular components so editors drag and drop real design system pieces rather than generic blocks.
A/B testing and personalisation built in
Native experimentation tools let marketing teams run split tests and personalise content without needing a separate optimisation platform.
Broad framework support
SDKs for Next.js, React, Angular, Vue, Svelte, Qwik, SolidJS, and React Native mean you are not locked into a single frontend framework.
Marketing team autonomy
Content and marketing teams can ship landing pages, campaign pages, and promotions independently, which frees up developer time for product work.
Structured and visual content modes
Builder.io supports both structured data models for developer-driven content and visual page building for marketing-driven content, giving teams flexibility in how they work.
Common questions
Prismic to Builder.io migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Prismic to Builder.io migration
How much does Prismic cost?
Prismic has a free plan for 1 user with limited API calls. The Starter plan is $7/month per user for small teams. The Small plan is $150/month for up to 25 users with more locales and API bandwidth. Medium is $500/month. Large and Enterprise plans go higher. The pricing jumps are significant once you need multiple locales or repositories. We've had clients hit the ceiling on the Small plan faster than expected because of how Prismic counts API calls and custom types.
What are the best Prismic alternatives?
Sanity is the alternative we recommend most. It gives you better content modelling, real-time collaboration, and a query language (GROQ) that's far more flexible than Prismic's API. Contentful is another option with a bigger ecosystem, though pricing is steeper. If you liked Prismic's Slices concept, Sanity's block-based content approach works similarly but with more depth. We've migrated multiple former Prismic agency partners to Sanity, and the developer experience improvement is always the first thing they mention.
Can I migrate from Prismic to another CMS?
Yes. We've migrated quite a few Prismic projects, mostly to Sanity. We export your custom types, documents, and media through Prismic's API, then restructure everything for the target platform. Prismic's Slice-based content maps well to Sanity's portable text and block system. Typical migrations take 3-5 weeks. We keep your existing Prismic site live throughout, so there's no downtime. The biggest challenge is usually handling Prismic's media library, since images need to be moved to a new CDN.
Is Prismic a good CMS for developers?
It's decent for simple projects. The Slice Machine tooling is clever and the TypeScript support has improved. But Prismic's API has limitations that frustrate developers on bigger projects. You can't do complex queries, filtering is basic, and the content modelling is shallow compared to Sanity or Contentful. The bigger issue is Prismic's track record of breaking API changes and infrastructure shifts that have caused production outages. Developers who need reliability and deep customization are better served elsewhere.
Why are teams leaving Prismic?
The main reasons we hear are API instability, limited content modelling depth, and pricing that doesn't match the feature set. Prismic has a history of making breaking changes to their API and infrastructure without adequate migration paths. One major version change left agencies (including us, when we were partners) with broken client sites and expensive rebuild bills. Teams also outgrow the content modelling quickly. Once you need complex relationships between content types, Prismic's flat structure becomes a bottleneck.
Can you migrate from Builder.io without losing your page designs?
Yes, but it takes work. Builder.io's visual editor stores page compositions as JSON that references your registered components. Those component registrations are tightly coupled to Builder's SDK, so you can't just export and import elsewhere. What you can preserve is the design itself. We extract the page structures, map them to equivalent components in the new system, and rebuild the composition layer. The visual output stays the same. Typical timeline is 6-10 weeks depending on how many page types and custom components are involved. The biggest time sink is usually recreating A/B test variants and personalisation rules that lived inside Builder's platform.
What does Builder.io actually cost?
Builder.io's free tier gives you 1 user and basic features, which is enough to evaluate but not to run a real project. The Growth plan starts at $49/month and includes more seats and content types. Beyond that, pricing gets opaque. Teams needing roles, scheduling, and higher API limits are pushed toward custom Enterprise plans that typically start in the $500-$1,000/month range. We've heard from freelancers and small agencies who were caught off guard by charges after exceeding limits on the Growth plan. Builder.io also charges per "impression" on higher tiers, which means your costs scale with traffic in ways that aren't always predictable.
How does Builder.io compare to a traditional headless CMS?
Builder.io is a visual page builder first and a CMS second. That distinction matters. If your primary goal is letting marketing teams build landing pages without developer involvement, Builder.io does that well. If you need structured content modelling, editorial workflows, multi-language support, or content that powers more than just web pages, a traditional headless CMS is a better fit. Builder.io's SDK embeds deeply into your frontend code, which creates vendor lock-in that most headless CMS platforms avoid. We typically recommend Builder.io only when the use case is narrow: high-volume landing page creation for marketing teams. For everything else, a headless CMS with a proper content model gives you more flexibility long-term.
What's the main risk of building on Builder.io?
Vendor lock-in. Builder.io's SDKs are woven into your component rendering layer, which means migrating away requires rebuilding how your pages are composed and rendered. That's not a content migration, it's an architecture migration. With a typical headless CMS, your content is accessible through standard APIs and your frontend is independent. With Builder.io, the two are intertwined. We've worked with teams who spent months extracting themselves from Builder.io because every page template needed to be recreated outside the platform. If you're evaluating Builder.io, go in with eyes open about the exit cost.
Get in touch
Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you
