# Sitecore to Framer migration > How to migrate from Sitecore to Framer, with a side-by-side comparison and FAQs. --- ## Source: Sitecore - **Type:** headless - **Official site:** https://www.sitecore.com - **Pricing:** https://www.sitecore.com/products/xm-cloud - **Last reviewed:** 2026-07-28 ## Target: Framer - **Type:** headless - **Official site:** https://www.framer.com - **Pricing:** https://www.framer.com/pricing - **Last reviewed:** 2026-07-28 ## Key advantages If you live in Figma all day, Framer is the right choice for you. You can import your layouts, tweak a few interactions, hit publish, and suddenly you’ve "built a website" without ever opening VS Code. The no-code editor is fast, the animations look like you actually care about UI, and the built-in hosting + global CDN means you never have to touch a server or pretend you know what an SSL certificate is. Multiple people can jump in, rewrite copy, adjust layouts, and preview the site instantly in real time with zero handoff pain, and "can you push this to staging?" nonsense. The SEO defaults are strong, images automatically behave, and performance is fast without you having to obsess over Lighthouse scores. Can't knock the service, but we're here when you're looking to build something more scalable. ### Ability to control layout with drag and drop You can drag, drop, and publish without the need for any developer or having experience in website development. With Framer, you can easily turn your mockup into a working page. ### Quick and cheap to build something If you need a site yesterday (and on a budget), go ahead with Framer. You can go from a Figma-level idea to a live marketing page in a few hours without writing any code or having developers wait on stand-ups. ### Some optimization comes by default Framer quietly handles things like image compression, semantic markup, and basic SEO hygiene. You ship quickly, and the site doesn't fall apart in Lighthouse analyses. ### Huge library of themes You can pick a template, tweak a few components, and you’re basically done. Its theme library is stacked, and most of it looks "portfolio ready" right out of the box. ### Real-time team collaboration Multiple people can jump in, edit, comment, and tweak designs live like Figma. It speeds up feedback loops and kills the endless back-and-forth. ### Intuitive, designer-friendly UI If you know your way around Figma, you’ll be able to use Framer without any difficulty. Framer’s interface is simple, and keeps designers moving without begging a developer for help. ## Key pain points Framer looks incredible until you ask it to behave like a real CMS. The moment you go beyond a tiny blog or a five-page marketing site, the cracks show fast. The CMS is bare-bones, the editor eats half your screen. Let's not forget the slow previews, sticky panels, and random bugs that make you question your life choices. And then there’s the pricing. Basic caps you at 2 collections, and the costs that bite aren't the headline plan price. They're the $20/month per editor, the $10/month content editors, and the $20 per language for localisation. The May 2026 changes cut editor seats but kept that per-language charge, which the community has not let go. Framer isn’t built for deep structures, complex logic, or anything resembling enterprise workflows. If you’re already knee-deep in a Framer setup and not sure whether to scale, switch, or salvage, reach out to us. We’ll help you figure out the smartest path forward (and save you from the pain). ### Basic CMS Framer’s CMS works for blogs and small sites, but anything bigger starts to feel cramped. If you are looking for complex structures, relationships, or enterprise-level content operations, you’ll hit the walls quickly. ### Not built for serious eCommerce It can handle a simple store, but anything custom, multi-variant, or large-scale becomes a hackathon. If you’re planning real eCommerce, you’ll want something sturdier. ### Only friendly for designers If you’ve never touched design tools, the UI has a learning curve, and there’s no deep tutorial to hold your hand. You’re on your own after the basics. ### Limited advanced features Things like user roles, workflows, or deep automation are difficult on Framer. Great for designers; less great for anyone who needs serious operational features. ### Small plugin ecosystem The community is growing, but nowhere near Webflow or mature CMS platforms. If you need niche integrations or extensions, expect roadblocks or custom work. ### Not suited for complex or multi-language sites As soon as you need structured data, heavy localisation, or custom code, Framer starts to feel restrictive. Headless CMS platforms handle this far better. ## Frequently asked questions ### 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. ### Does Framer support headless or API content delivery? Not really. Framer renders and hosts your site on its own infrastructure, and the CMS is built to feed that frontend, not to serve content over an API to another app. There is a read API for pulling collection data out, which is enough for an export or a migration, but you can't point a separate Next.js or mobile app at Framer as a content backend the way you would with Sanity or Contentful. If you need one content source feeding a website, an app, and a few other surfaces, Framer is the wrong shape. A headless CMS is built for exactly that.