# Sitecore to Payload migration > How to migrate from Sitecore to Payload, 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: Payload - **Type:** headless - **Official site:** https://payloadcms.com - **Pricing:** https://payloadcms.com/enterprise - **Last reviewed:** 2026-07-28 ## Key advantages Payload is genuinely strong tech. It’s fast, open-source, developer-first, and perfect if you want full control over your content model. The Next.js integration is smooth, the admin UI is clean, and it’s one of the more flexible modern CMS options if your team prefers to build things exactly the way you want them. Just know that if you want actual features like visual editing, Vercel Blob storage, image handling, etc, you’ll be paying extra for the privilege. If you’re considering Payload or thinking about migrating into (or out of) it, reach out to us. We can help you figure out whether it’s the right stack or guide you toward a cleaner, saner (Sanity) setup. ### Integration with Next.js applications Payload works natively with Next.js, giving you clean data fetching and a smooth development flow. It removes the usual CMS friction so you can build fast, modern frontends without hacks. ### Fully customizable Everything is configured in code, which means you can tailor the CMS to your exact use case. You define the logic, workflows, and behaviour. ### Supports custom data models You can design any content structure your project needs, from simple documents to complex relational models. This gives you full control over how content is organised and delivered. ### Intuitive admin UI Payload’s admin panel is simple, clean, and fast. Editors can create, update, and manage content without training or digging through confusing menus. ### Custom plugins and APIs You can extend Payload however you like. Build custom fields, integrate external services, or add your own API routes. Perfect for teams that need deeper project-specific functionality. ### Built-in authentication Payload comes with user auth, roles, and access control baked in. No external auth service needed, and you can customise permissions to match your editorial workflow. ## Key pain points Payload’s biggest issue is how quickly it hands you the responsibility baton. Because it leans so heavily on self-hosting, you’re suddenly running databases, managing infra, dealing with scaling, and debugging auth quirks at 11 pm. And since the platform is still maturing, updates can feel unpredictable, and the surrounding ecosystem isn’t quite deep enough yet to soften the landing when something breaks. The recent Figma acquisition didn’t help either. Support has felt a bit lighter, and some priorities clearly shifted, alongside pricing. Payload feels flexible on day one, the moment your project grows you’re either engineering around gaps or paying more than expected. If you're debating whether Payload fits the future of your stack (or you’re already feeling the cracks), we’re always happy to help you plan a cleaner path or a migration that won’t come back to bite you. ### Steep learning curve Payload’s code-first approach means you need solid dev experience to use it effectively. Non-technical teams will struggle, and onboarding takes longer compared to more guided CMSs. ### Smaller ecosystem of plugins There aren’t many ready-made extensions, so you’ll end up building features yourself. This adds development time and increases long-term maintenance. ### Potential performance overhead Because it’s a full JavaScript backend, Payload can get resource-heavy under high traffic. You’ll need to optimise your server setup and monitor performance more closely. ### Gaps in documentation The docs are improving, but there are still missing pieces and unclear sections. New users often have to dig through GitHub issues to find answers. ### Small community The community is growing but still small, so there’s less shared knowledge, fewer tutorials, and slower troubleshooting compared to bigger CMS ecosystems. ### Requires separate hosting Payload doesn’t come with built-in hosting, so you’re responsible for setting up and managing your server. That adds extra cost, extra setup, and extra operational overhead. ## 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.