Case Study
View Case StudyTray.ai
Migrating hundreds of thousands of pages, re-platforming and extending for the leading composable AI integration platform
From Storyblok to Builder.io
We are the Storyblok to Builder.io migration experts
Last verified:
Challenges with Storyblok
Key pain points
Storyblok is not our first recommendation for a headless CMS. The product looks polished, but documentation sprawl makes initial setup harder than it should be, and non-technical editors routinely get lost navigating spaces, stories, and nested components.
Pricing is the bigger issue. Extra locales are $20/month each, extra seats are $15/month each, and custom roles, SSO, and the GraphQL API are all gated behind the custom-priced Premium and Elite plans. Teams on Growth ($99/month) often end up on Growth Plus ($349/month) not because they want the extra features, but because they hit an API request or locale limit.
You'll also lean on third-party integrations for a lot of ordinary tasks, which means more code paths to maintain. Webhook behaviour has changed between releases without clear deprecation notices. It's not a broken platform, it's just not a plug-and-play one.
Customisation can take effort
Storyblok can do almost anything, but sometimes the “how” involves developer time, CLI commands, or manual tweaking. Great control, just not always plug-and-play.
Some integrations need extra work
For things like CRMs or complex platforms, you’ll likely build the integration instead of installing it. Expect a bit more engineering.
Slower editing
Real-time previews are great, but large pages or heavy components can load slowly. Occasionally, the editor UI feels less intuitive than the rest of the platform.
Asset management isn’t perfect
Renaming assets, bulk editing, or cleaning libraries can take longer than expected. It is not streamlined like the rest of the system.
Permissions are fixed
Roles are predefined. For smaller teams, that’s perfectly fine. Bigger teams may want more granular access controls than Storyblok currently offers.
Pricing jumps with scale
You get a free tier, but some advanced features sit behind higher plans. It’s worth it for projects if you want to pay more; just something teams should budget for early.
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
Storyblok to Builder.io migration FAQs
Answers to the most common questions about Storyblok to Builder.io migration
What are the best Storyblok alternatives?
Sanity is the alternative we recommend most often. It offers deeper content modelling, real-time collaboration, and a pricing model that doesn't spike when you add features. Contentful is another option if you want a mature ecosystem, though it's pricier. For teams that loved Storyblok's visual editor, Sanity's Presentation tool now provides a similar live preview experience. We've migrated several Storyblok projects to Sanity, and the feedback from both editors and developers has been positive.
How much does Storyblok cost?
Storyblok has a Starter plan at $0 with 1 seat, 2 locales, and 100K API requests. The Growth plan is $99/month for 5 seats, 1M API requests, and 2 locales. Growth Plus is $349/month for 15 seats, 4M API requests, and 10 locales. Extra seats are $15/month each, extra locales $20/month, extra traffic $75/250GB. Premium and Elite are custom pricing and unlock SSO, custom roles, and the GraphQL API. Teams often outgrow the Growth plan on locales or API volume rather than features, which forces a $250/month jump.
Does Storyblok have a visual editor?
Yes, and it's one of the best in the headless CMS space. You see real-time changes as you edit, directly on your site preview. It's the main reason many teams pick Storyblok. That said, Sanity now offers a comparable experience through its Presentation tool, which gives you live visual editing with more flexibility in content modelling. If the visual editor is your primary reason for choosing Storyblok, it's worth comparing both before committing.
Can I migrate from Storyblok to another CMS?
Yes. We export your stories, components, and assets through Storyblok's API, then restructure everything for the target platform. Storyblok's component-based content model actually maps well to Sanity's block system. Most migrations take 3-5 weeks. The main challenge is handling Storyblok's nested component structure and translating field-level localization to the new platform's approach. We keep your site running on Storyblok throughout, so there's zero downtime during the switch.
Is Storyblok good for large websites?
It works for mid-size sites but starts showing strain at enterprise scale. The API has performance limitations when fetching deeply nested content, and the pricing jumps between tiers are steep. Teams with 50+ pages and multiple locales often find themselves on the Growth Plus plan ($349/month) or pushed toward Premium sooner than expected, especially because custom roles and SSO only appear on enterprise tiers. For large-scale projects, we typically recommend Sanity instead. Its GROQ query language handles complex content relationships more efficiently, and pricing scales more predictably.
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
