Case study
View case studySlingshot Bio
Roboto converged Slingshot Bio's WordPress and Shopify sites into one headless Shopify build on Next.js and Sanity, instrumented end to end and AI-ready.
From Sitecore to Joomla
We are the Sitecore to Joomla 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.
Benefits of Joomla
Key advantages
Recommending Joomla in 2026 feels a bit like recommending Internet Explorer. But if you must use it, it does earn a few real points. The multilingual support is built in, so you run a five-language site without a pile of plugins. The access-control system is more detailed than most enterprise platforms, and the modular structure gives developers room to build complex, multi-section sites. If you have a big editorial team that needs genuinely granular permissions, Joomla holds up.
If you are set on Joomla and we cannot talk you out of it, we will point you to an agency that still happily ships heavy old templates. Or sit down with us for half an hour, and we will at least make sure you do not regret the journey.
Native multilingual support
Joomla ships with multilingual features baked in, so you don’t need a plugin graveyard just to run a site in five languages. It handles translations cleanly and is one of the few CMS platforms that gets this right out of the box.
Granular user permission system
Its ACL system is its biggest bragging right. You can lock down roles, workflows, and access rules with a level of control that most CMS platforms still envy.
Custom field capabilities
Joomla gives you solid flexibility with custom fields, letting you shape structured content without hacking together a dozen extensions. It’s powerful enough for complex layouts and multi-section content.
Active developer community
The community isn’t massive, but the people who are there are dedicated, technical, and still shipping useful extensions and documentation. If you're deep in Joomla land, it’s a lifeline.
Strong security foundation
Kept patched, Joomla is stable and the core team takes security seriously, with regular updates. The catch is the "kept patched" part. The 2026 JCE editor exploit hit sites that fell behind, so the upkeep is on you.
Modular architecture flexibility
Its module-based layout system lets you build multi-section portals, dashboards, and content-heavy sites without bending the platform backward. If you know what you're doing, it’s flexible enough to scale.
Common questions
Sitecore to Joomla migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Sitecore to Joomla migration
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.
Is Joomla free?
Yes. Joomla is open-source software under the GPL, so there is no licence fee and you can download Joomla 6 and self-host it for nothing. The real cost is everything around it. You pay for hosting, for any commercial extensions and templates you bring in, and for the developer time that keeps it patched and upgraded. Treat the price tag as hosting plus extensions plus maintenance, not a SaaS subscription. On a busy site those running costs add up fast, which is the part most "Joomla is free" claims quietly skip.
Can I migrate from Joomla to Sanity?
Yes, and it tends to be cleaner than a Joomla version upgrade. Joomla stores everything in MySQL, so we script the content extraction, map your articles, categories, and custom fields into a Sanity content model, and rebuild the frontend in Next.js. For a typical site of 500 to 2,000 pages, budget 6 to 12 weeks. The extraction takes a few days. The rest goes on the new frontend, replacing whatever your extensions used to do, and mapping 301 redirects so you keep your search rankings. The payoff is no more PHP version juggling and no near-rebuild every time the platform bumps a major version.
What are Joomla's main limitations?
Three things bite. First, major upgrades are brutal. Joomla 3 and 4 both reached end of life in October 2025, so anyone still on them is running unpatched software, and moving up a major version often breaks extensions and templates badly enough to feel like a rebuild. Second, the extension and template ecosystem is small next to WordPress, and maintainers keep drifting away. Third, the developer experience is dated and the admin panel is hard to navigate, so editor productivity suffers. Security upkeep is on you too, as the JCE editor exploit doing the rounds in 2026 reminded plenty of sites.
Joomla vs WordPress vs headless, which should I pick?
For a content site you want to keep cheap and simple, WordPress wins on ecosystem size and the sheer number of developers who know it. Joomla's honest edges are native multilingual and its access-control system, so it makes sense if you genuinely need granular permissions across a big editorial team. But both are PHP monoliths that tie your content to your frontend. If you care about performance, want a modern build with React or Next.js, and plan to push content to a web app, a mobile app, and a few other places at once, go headless. We pair Sanity with Next.js for exactly that, and it is where most teams leaving Joomla end up.
Get in touch
Tell us what you're building. We reply within one working day — Jono or someone on the team picks up every message personally.
