Sitecore logo
Contentstack logo

From Sitecore to Contentstack

We are the Sitecore to Contentstack migration experts

Last verified:



Challenges with Sitecore

Key pain points

Sitecore is one of the most expensive CMS platforms on the market. Licensing starts around $40,000-$65,000/year for basic XM, and a full XP or XC deployment with implementation lands in the $500,000+ range over three years. On top of the licence, you need specialised .NET developers on retainer, and those contracts aren't cheap either.

The complexity catches most teams off guard. Upgrading between Sitecore versions is closer to a rebuild than an update. Content is stored in a tree structure that doesn't map cleanly to other systems, which makes migrations painful and locks you into the platform longer than you'd like. The editor UI still feels like a late-2000s enterprise portal, and anything beyond basic publishing needs developer involvement.

Most mid-sized companies using Sitecore pay for personalisation and marketing automation they never turn on. If that sounds familiar, a headless CMS paired with a modern frontend gives you 80% of the useful capability at a fraction of the cost. We've moved clients off Sitecore and cut annual platform spend by 60-80% without losing functionality that actually mattered.

Help me migrate


Benefits of Contentstack

Key advantages

Contentstack is one of the more polished enterprise headless CMS platforms. It has API-first, composable, and loaded with the usual DXP buzzwords. It actually backs some of it up. The workflows are strong, role-based approvals are genuinely helpful for large editorial teams, and the visual builder plus modular blocks give marketers enough power to ship pages without pinging developers every 30 seconds. Its omnichannel delivery, multi-region CDNs, and fast APIs make it a solid fit for global brands with heavy traffic and complex localisation needs.

But this is firmly in enterprise territory. We generally don’t recommend platforms in the “DXP with 47 whitepapers” category, but if you must pick one, Contentstack at least has a smoother developer experience than most. The composable architecture is well thought out, integrations behave predictably, and the SDKs play nicely with modern frameworks like Next.js. If you're a Fortune-500-sized team and want help figuring out whether this is the right bet, or want a modern alternative instead, get in touch.

Start my migration


A dark shield icon and a glowing white circle on a grid background.

Enterprise-grade composable architecture

Built for large teams shipping across markets. The stack scales fast, stays stable under heavy traffic, and doesn’t crumble the moment your marketing team schedules a global launch.

Advanced workflow and approvals

Advanced workflow and approvals

Contentstack’s workflow engine handles multi-step approvals, roles, and governance without duct tape. Perfect for teams that need structure instead of Slack chaos.

Multi-region CDN delivery

Multi-region CDN delivery

Your content gets pushed worldwide through edge CDNs, keeping delivery fast even when your customers are nowhere near your servers.

Dark grid with various abstract UI icons: an image, PDF folder, play button, pointer, and bar graph.

API-first microservices design

Developers get flexibility without wrestling with legacy monolith logic with REST, GraphQL, and webhooks.

Extensive React/Next.js SDKs

Extensive React/Next.js SDKs

Strong developer tooling means faster builds and fewer hours wasted writing boilerplate just to fetch and render content.

MACH-compliant infrastructure

MACH-compliant infrastructure

Fully modular, cloud-native, and replaceable in parts. Plays nicely inside modern composable stacks instead of dragging you back to 2010.





Common questions

Sitecore to Contentstack migration FAQs

Answers to the most common questions about Sitecore to Contentstack migration



Get in touch

Fill out the form below and we'll get back to you