Webflow vs. Framer vs. WordPress Comparison

In 2025, choosing the right Content Management System (CMS) for your website is more complex than ever. The market has evolved significantly from the days when WordPress dominated as the only viable option. Today, platforms like Webflow and Framer offer compelling alternatives, each with unique strengths and limitations.

Unlike many agencies that exclusively work with a single platform, we take pride in our experience across all three. We've built and maintained hundreds of websites using Webflow, WordPress, and Framer, giving us a unique perspective on their real-world performance. This hands-on experience has taught us that there's no universal "best" platform—each CMS excels in specific scenarios and falls short in others.

To provide concrete data for this comparison, we've gone beyond theoretical analysis. We built identical websites on all 3 platforms to measure and compare their performance objectively. This approach allows us to present real metrics rather than relying on marketing claims or general perceptions (aka, we are using the scientific method).

This guide provides an in-depth comparison based on six critical factors that will impact your website day-to-day operations:

• Speed and performance: We will test identical sites across all three platforms using GTmetrix (an industry-standard tool for speed tests), analyzing everything from load times to page size. This gives you concrete data to understand how each platform performs in real-world conditions.
• Ease of use: We'll examine how each platform handles content management, site updates, and development workflows. This section helps you understand which CMS best matches your team's technical capabilities and workflow needs.
• Maintenance requirements: Learn about the ongoing maintenance each platform requires, from regular updates and backups to potential compatibility issues. This insight helps you plan for the long-term management of your website.
• Security features: Discover how each platform handles security threats, what vulnerabilities exist, and what measures you can take to protect your site. We'll share real experiences from managing hundreds of sites across all three platforms.
• Available integrations: Compare the integration capabilities and ecosystem support of each platform, from built-in features to third-party plugins and apps. This helps you ensure your chosen CMS can support all your technical requirements.
• Cost analysis: Understand the true cost of ownership for each platform, including hosting, maintenance, and potential hidden expenses as your site grows. We break down pricing for different usage scenarios to help you budget effectively.

Our analysis is based on building hundreds of websites across all three platforms, giving us unique insight into where each CMS truly excels or falls short. Most importantly, we'll help you understand which platform aligns best with your specific needs rather than pushing a one-size-fits-all solution.

Whether you're a marketer choosing a platform for your company's website, a developer evaluating options for client projects, or a business owner planning a new web presence, this guide will help you make an informed decision based on your specific requirements rather than following market trends blindly.

To provide an objective comparison of performance across all three platforms, we built identical websites on Webflow, WordPress, and Framer. This approach eliminates variables that might skew results when comparing different sites. Here's exactly how we set up our test:

Testing environment and setup

For complete transparency, here's how each platform was configured:

• Webflow: Using CMS hosting plan
• Framer: Using Basic hosting plan
• WordPress: Hosted on DigitalOcean with RunCloud as a server manager, using a combination of Apache and Nginx. Built using Elementor as the page builder, which we chose for its popularity and ease of use

Testing methodology

We used GTmetrix for our performance testing instead of Google PageSpeed Insights. Why? While PageSpeed Insights is popular, it often provides false positives and tests sites using outdated devices with throttled connections. GTmetrix offers more accurate, real-world performance metrics that better reflect what your users will experience.

Our testing focused on two critical metrics that directly impact user experience:

• Fully Loaded Time: How long it takes for the entire page to become completely interactive
• Total Page Size: The complete weight of the page, which affects load times and bandwidth usage

Test results: Who is the fastest?

Here are the performance metrics for each platform:

1. Webflow

• Fully Loaded Time: 1.6 seconds
• Total Page Size: 1.27 MB
• Navigate to Webflow build here

2. WordPress

• Fully Loaded Time: 1.8 seconds
• Total Page Size: 1.01 MB
• Navigate to WordPress build here

3. Framer

• Fully Loaded Time: 3.0 seconds
• Total Page Size: 1.16 MB
• Navigate to Framer build here

The results reveal some interesting patterns that deserve explanation:

• Webflow's speed advantage: Despite having the largest page size (1.27 MB), Webflow achieved the fastest load time. This seemingly counterintuitive result comes from Webflow's static file generation system. It pre-renders all HTML, CSS, and JavaScript files and serves them directly from its servers, eliminating the processing time needed by dynamic sites.
• WordPress's efficient size: WordPress achieved the smallest page size (1.01 MB) thanks to its ability to load only the necessary CSS and JavaScript for each page. Unlike Webflow and Framer, which load all CSS and JS for all pages in each load, WordPress can be optimized to load only what's needed.
• Framer's performance While Framer's load time was longer, it's worth noting that its performance can improve significantly as your site grows. Unlike WordPress, which usually slows down with more pages and content, Framer's React-based architecture helps maintain consistent performance at scale.

It's worth mentioning that all of these CMS are fast, meaning that while Webflow definitely leads the race here, that doesn't mean the other ones are slow.

Another important thing to note is that while speed is crucial, it shouldn't be the only factor in your decision. As we'll explore in subsequent sections, other aspects like ease of use, maintenance requirements, and scalability play equally important roles in determining the best platform for your needs.

How easy a CMS is to use can make or break your team's productivity and satisfaction. However, ease of use is highly subjective and depends heavily on your team's technical background and workflow needs. Let's examine how each platform performs in real-world scenarios.

Webflow: Easy to edit, but not so easy to start from scratch

Webflow's approach to website editing centers around its Webflow Designer interface, a visual canvas that displays your pages exactly as they'll appear on the web. For simple content updates like changing text, replacing images, or updating links, Webflow offers a very intuitive experience that most team members can handle without technical training.

On the other side, the CMS functionality in Webflow takes a structured approach to content. You create collections (similar to content types) that serve as templates for recurring content like blog posts, team members, or product listings. Once these templates are set up, adding new content becomes straightforward – imagine it filling out a well-organized form rather than spending hours with layout and design decisions.

However, Webflow's apparent simplicity can be deceptive when it comes to building new pages or components from scratch. The platform requires a solid understanding of the HTML and CSS box model, along with knowledge of how CSS classes work. This isn't just about following tutorials – it requires genuine understanding of front-end development principles.

This creates a natural division in Webflow's ease of use:

• Text or image updates, and CMS content creation are highly accessible and easy for marketing teams.
• Building new layouts, components, or pages requires technical expertise and is best handled by experienced web developers.

Framer: Just like Webflow, but a little more friendly for designers

At first glance, Framer presents itself as more user-friendly than Webflow. Its interface is clean, modern, and appears more approachable, especially for designers coming from tools like Figma. The visual editing capabilities feel familiar, and the overall experience seems designed to make website creation more accessible.

This initial impression can be misleading. While Framer's interface may look simpler, building functional websites requires similar technical knowledge to Webflow.

Users need to understand the HTML box model, or at least advanced auto-layout systems and component hierarchies. The platform essentially trades Webflow's explicit CSS classes for a design system approach that, while powerful and seemingly more intuitive, still demands significant technical understanding.

The key difference lies in the mental model: Framer thinks like a design tool that outputs websites, while Webflow thinks like a web development tool with a visual interface. This distinction becomes crucial when choosing between the platforms:

• Designers comfortable with Figma may find Framer's approach more natural.
• Teams with web development experience might prefer Webflow's more direct connection to traditional front-end technologies.
• Both platforms require significant learning investment for non-technical users.

WordPress: Easy to start, but things can get very complex

WordPress's ease of use story is complex and heavily influenced by your choice of page builder. Elementor, the most popular builder, offers an intuitive interface where you can drag elements onto your page, adjust their properties through sidebars, and see changes in real-time. This visual approach makes it particularly accessible for marketing teams creating new pages or modifying existing ones.

The page-building experience itself is straightforward – you can easily add sections, columns, text blocks, images, and other elements without touching code. Each element has clear controls for spacing, colors, typography, and responsive behavior. This makes Elementor (and similar builders like Divi) more approachable than Webflow or Framer for users making minor layout or design changes, without having technical backgrounds.

However, this simplified page editing is only part of the story. WordPress's plugin-based architecture means that different functionalities often live in completely separate parts of the dashboard. For example:

• You edit your WordPress pages with one builder
• Your forms might be managed in another plugin's interface
• Pop-ups could be controlled in another
• SEO settings might be in a fourth
• Security configurations in a fifth

This fragmentation creates a challenging situation: while each individual tool might be user-friendly, the overall system becomes increasingly complex as you add functionality.

Users often need to learn multiple interfaces and remember where (many) different settings live. Something as simple as adding a contact form to your site might involve switching between your page builder and a form plugin's interface, each with its own logic and workflow.

So, at the end, which one is the easiest?

The key takeaway isn't about which platform is easiest; it's about matching your team's technical capabilities with each platform's requirements:

• WordPress: Simple to start, requires significant technical expertise as complexity grows
• Webflow: Technical for initial site building but simple and friendly for further modifications
• Framer: Complicated for initial build, but it's quite friendly (especially for designers) after that

Maintenance can make or break your website's long-term success (quite literally). It's not just about keeping your site running – it's about ensuring security, maintaining performance, and managing updates efficiently. Each platform handles these challenges differently, and understanding these differences is crucial for planning your long-term website strategy.

WordPress: The high-maintenance option

WordPress's open architecture creates unique maintenance challenges. Since the platform relies on multiple independent plugins working together, regular maintenance becomes essential rather than optional. Here's what maintaining a WordPress site typically involves:

Plugin updates: WordPress sites often use 10-20 plugins (sometimes more), each developed by different teams. These plugins update independently, sometimes multiple times per week. While updates are essential for security and functionality, they can create compatibility issues. For example, updating WordPress core might break a plugin that hasn't been updated for the new version, or updating one plugin might conflict with another.

Regular maintenance tasks: A typical WordPress maintenance schedule includes:

• Monthly WordPress core system updates
• Weekly plugin updates
• Regular database cleaning
• Backup system management
• Security monitoring and updates
• Caching setup and management
• Performance optimization as content grows

So, WordPress is definitely not on the side of 'easy-to-maintain', but to be fair, with a good web development team, all of these tasks can run flawless.

Webflow and Framer: The low-maintenance alternatives

Both Webflow and Framer take a fundamentally different approach to maintenance through their closed, managed platform architecture. This creates several key advantages:

Automatic platform updates: Updates to the core platform happen automatically and invisibly. Since these platforms are closed systems, there's no risk of compatibility issues between components. Your site simply works, and improvements roll out seamlessly without requiring your attention.

No plugin management: While both platforms offer add-on capabilities (aka 'Webflow Apps' and 'Framer Plugins') through their app/plugin marketplaces, these integrations don't have direct access to the core platform. This means:

• No compatibility issues between different components
• No need to manage multiple update schedules
• Reduced security risks from third-party code

Built-in security and backups: Both platforms handle security updates, SSL certificates, and backups automatically. This eliminates many of the routine maintenance tasks required by WordPress installations.

So, what's the maintenance investment I need to consider?

When considering maintenance requirements, there's a clear divide between WordPress and the managed platforms:

• WordPress sites: We recommend monthly maintenance at a minimum, involving a developer checking all updates, testing compatibility, and ensuring security. Sites with frequent content updates or e-commerce functionality often need weekly attention.
• Webflow and Framer sites These platforms typically require minimal maintenance beyond content updates. We've managed sites for years with virtually no platform-related maintenance tasks. This doesn't mean they're maintenance-free – you still need to manage content and monitor performance – but the technical maintenance burden is practically none.

The maintenance factor often becomes decisive for teams without dedicated technical resources. While WordPress offers more flexibility, that flexibility comes with a maintenance cost that can become substantial over time.

Website security isn't just about preventing hacks – it's about protecting your business's reputation, maintaining customer trust, and ensuring operational continuity. Each CMS approaches security very differently, with varying levels of responsibility falling on your team.

Webflow and Framer: Managed security

Both Webflow and Framer take a closed-platform approach to security, which provides several inherent advantages:

Platform-level protection: As closed, managed platforms, Webflow and Framer handle security at the infrastructure level. Over our five years with Webflow and two years with Framer, we've never encountered a security breach across hundreds of client sites. This remarkable track record stems from:

• Automated security updates and patches
• Regular platform-wide security audits
• Managed SSL certificates
• Built-in DDoS protection
• Limited attack surface due to closed architecture

Reduced risk surface: Since these platforms don't allow direct server access or third-party code execution, many traditional security vulnerabilities simply don't exist. All integrations happen through controlled APIs, significantly reducing the risk of security breaches.

WordPress: Security (strongly) depends on configuration

WordPress's security story is more complex, reflecting its open-source nature and extensive plugin ecosystem. In our decade of WordPress experience, we've encountered various security challenges, but modern WordPress can be highly secure with the right approach.

Historical context: WordPress sites were historically frequent targets for hackers, particularly through:

• Outdated plugins with known vulnerabilities
• Outdated WordPress core installations
• Weak authentication systems
• Plugin conflicts creating security holes

For example, in March 2022, a critical vulnerability was discovered in Elementor, one of WordPress's most popular page builders with over 5 million installations. The vulnerability allowed any authenticated user to upload arbitrary PHP code, potentially compromising the entire site. While the issue was eventually patched, it took nearly two weeks from discovery to fix, leaving millions of sites potentially vulnerable during this period.

Modern security solutions: The WordPress ecosystem has evolved significantly in response to these historical challenges. Today's WordPress installations can leverage a robust set of security tools and practices that transform the platform into a highly secure environment when properly configured. This modern approach combines traditional security measures with advanced protection systems that can rival any enterprise-grade CMS. Here's how WordPress can be secured:

• Regular plugin, theme and WordPress core updates
• Two-factor authentication for all users
• IP whitelisting for dashboard access
• Advanced firewall configurations
• Automated backup systems

On top of that, there is a new type of WordPress environment that pretty much removes all security problems, by adopting a very similar infraestructure to Webflow:

Static site generation: One of the most significant advancements in WordPress security comes from modern development approaches that fundamentally change how WordPress sites are deployed. Static site generation has emerged as a powerful solution that addresses many traditional WordPress security concerns at their root (Simply Static has gotten very popular in the last few months).

By converting dynamic WordPress sites into static files, we can create an architecture that dramatically reduces potential attack vectors while maintaining WordPress's powerful content management capabilities. This approach:

• Separates the WordPress dashboard from the public-facing site
• Converts dynamic pages to static HTML, providing similar security benefits to Webflow's static generation

Making a security-conscious choice

Your security requirements should influence your platform choice:

Choose WordPress if:

• You have a internal or external technical team to actively manage security
• Your site needs extensive customization that justifies the security overhead
• Your team can respond quickly to security updates and emergencies

Choose Webflow or Framer if:

• Security is a top priority but you lack dedicated security resources
• You prefer a "set it and forget it" security approach
• Your team isn't equipped to handle security emergencies

The key is understanding that while WordPress can be made very secure, it requires active effort and expertise. Webflow and Framer provide robust security by default, making them better choices for teams without dedicated security resources.

The ability to extend your website's functionality through integrations can significantly impact what you can achieve with your chosen platform. As of January 2025, the integration landscape across these platforms shows dramatic differences in scale and capability.

WordPress: The clear integration and ecosystem winner

WordPress dominates the CMS market with 62% market share, and this dominance directly translates into integration capabilities. The WordPress ecosystem includes:

• Over 59,000 free plugins in the official directory
• Thousands of premium plugins across various marketplaces
• More than 500 featured plugins with 100,000+ active installations each

This massive ecosystem means that if you need to add specific functionality to your WordPress site, there's likely already a plugin for it. For example, if you need to:

• Add rich snippets to your pages
• Integrate your forms with a not-so-popular CRM
• Implement complex e-commerce features
• Create advanced form logic workflows

Any of these solutions (and many more) are usually available through existing plugins, often requiring minimal technical setup.

Webflow: Growing but still limited

Webflow's integration ecosystem, while growing, remains significantly smaller than WordPress's:

• 253 apps in the Webflow Apps Marketplace (many of which are actually very lightweight add-ons rather than full-featured applications)
• It is limited to specific types of integrations that can't radically expand the platform features

While Webflow platform alone covers most common business needs, implementing specialized functionality often requires custom development or third-party workarounds.

Framer: Even smaller than Webflow

Unfortunately, Framer has the smallest ecosystem of the three with only 105 plugins currently available (and like on Webflow, many of which are actually very lightweight addons), primarily focused on design and interaction features.

As the newest platform, Framer's integration options are still emerging. While it greatly serves design-focused needs, it may require additional development work for complex business integrations.

Making the right choice for your integration needs

Your integration requirements should heavily influence your platform choice. Let's explore how each platform fits different integration scenarios.

WordPress remains the clear choice for projects requiring extensive integrations or specialized functionality. If your website needs to connect with multiple third-party services, custom APIs, or niche business tools, WordPress's vast ecosystem provides many solutions.

However, this flexibility comes with the responsibility of managing multiple plugins and their interactions, so you'll need technical resources to handle this complexity effectively.

Webflow and Framer take a more streamlined approach to integrations. While both platforms offer fewer options than WordPress, they focus on delivering high-quality, well-tested integrations for common business needs.

These platforms are ideal for projects that prioritize reliability and ease of maintenance over extensive customization. You'll find solid solutions for standard requirements like analytics, marketing tools, and popular CRM integrations, but yout may need to invest in custom development for more specialized needs.

Understanding the true cost of each platform goes beyond comparing their basic pricing plans. Let's examine both direct costs and hidden expenses that affect your total investment.

Webflow and Framer: Initially predictable but (big) scaling costs

Both Webflow and Framer operate on a SaaS model with tiered pricing based on features and usage. Here's how their business-focused plans compare:

Webflow Business Plan ($109/month)

• Up to 300 pages (static)
• 40 CMS collections
• 10,000 CMS items
• 200GB bandwidth
• Custom domain included
• All CMS features

For this plan, we are considering the 200GB bandwidth upgrade, to make a fair comparison vs. Framer.

Framer Startup Plan ($75/month)

• Up to 15,000 pages (combined static and CMS)
• 20 CMS collections
• 200GB bandwidth
• All core CMS features

Important bandwidth consideration: Once you exceed 500GB of bandwidth on either platform (both of their current self-serve plan includes a max of 500GB), you must upgrade to an Enterprise plan (in either Webflow or Framer). This is a critical decision point, as Enterprise plans typically start at tens of thousands of dollars annually. Many growing businesses hit this threshold unexpectedly, leading to significant unexpected costs.

WordPress: Lower base costs, but variable expenses

WordPress takes a fundamentally different approach to pricing since it's an open-source platform, meaning you only need to pay for a web server to host your WordPress site.

Here's an example of our recommended technical setup:

Basic Infrastructure ($21/month)

Server: DigitalOcean Droplet Grade 3 ($12/month)

• 2GB RAM
• 1 dedicated CPU
• 50GB SSD storage
• 2TB transfer bandwidth (This is 10X the bandwidth of Webflow and Framer's standard plans at less than 1/4 of the price)

Server Management: RunCloud Essentials Plan ($9/month)

• Server management and optimization
• Security and backup management

This setup provides enterprise-level bandwidth at a fraction of the cost of managed platforms. However, the total cost of ownership includes additional components like premium themes, plugin licenses, and the cost of the ongoing maintenance investment.

Hidden costs and scaling considerations

As your site grows, each platform handles costs differently.

Webflow and Framer provide predictable monthly costs with their SaaS model, but this predictability comes with strict usage limits.

WordPress, on the other hand, offers more flexible scaling options. While you'll need to manage multiple components like hosting, plugins, and maintenance, the base costs scale much more efficiently with traffic. A WordPress site can handle significant traffic increases without the dramatic price jumps you'd see with Webflow or Framer's Enterprise tiers.

For many organizations, particularly those without dedicated technical teams, the apparently higher costs of Webflow or Framer can actually represent better value when considering total cost of ownership. However, for teams with technical resources and higher traffic needs, WordPress's flexibility and lower base costs often prove more economical in the long run.

After examining speed, ease of use, maintenance, security, integrations, and costs across all three platforms, it's clear that each CMS excels in different scenarios. Let's break down the ideal use cases for each platform to help you make an informed decision.

When WordPress shines

WordPress proves most valuable for organizations that:

• Need to connect multiple tools and systems, as virtually any integration is possible through plugins
• Want to handle high traffic volumes cost-effectively (2TB bandwidth for $21/month vs. $40,000+/year on other platforms)
• Have developers (internal or agency) who can handle regular updates and maintenance
• Require complex features that would be expensive to custom-build on other platforms
• Want to keep costs predictable as traffic grows, rather than hitting enterprise pricing tiers

Perfect for: Large organizations with technical resources, growing businesses that need flexibility, content-heavy sites requiring numerous integrations, and projects with significant traffic expectations.

When Webflow makes sense

Webflow becomes the ideal choice when you need:

• A professionally designed website that's easy to manage once built, even though initial development requires technical knowledge
• Clear roles where developers build templates and marketing teams manage content
• Built-in security and maintenance without needing a technical team
• Fixed monthly costs (as long as you stay under 500GB bandwidth)
• Simple content editing tools that marketing teams can use without touching code

Perfect for: Medium-sized businesses with mixed technical/marketing teams, agencies managing multiple client sites, and organizations that value ease of maintenance over unlimited flexibility.

When Framer is the answer

Framer works best for organizations that:

• Have designers who want to build websites using familiar design tool interfaces
• Want to prototype and build production sites in the same tool
• Prefer working with components and design systems rather than traditional web development
• Need a platform that bridges the gap between design and development teams

Perfect for: Design agencies, product companies with strong design focus, and teams transitioning from design tools to web development.

Making your decision

Rather than focusing solely on features or costs, consider these key factors:

• Team composition: Think about your technical capabilities: Do you have developers who can maintain a WordPress site? Will you need ongoing support from an agency? Consider who will handle day-to-day updates and whether your team's current skillset aligns with your chosen platform.
• Growth trajectory: Evaluate your expected growth and integration requirements. Consider whether you'll need to handle high traffic volumes or connect multiple business tools. Remember that WordPress offers more flexibility but requires management, while Webflow and Framer might push you into enterprise pricing tiers as you scale.
• Budget reality: Be clear about your bandwidth needs and how they affect long-term costs. While WordPress starts cheaper, it includes ongoing maintenance costs. Think about whether you can handle variable maintenance expenses or if you prefer the predictable pricing of Webflow and Framer until you hit enterprise levels.

Choose what works, not what's trendy

As an agency that works across all 3 platforms, we've learned that being platform-agnostic allows us to choose the right tool for each specific situation. While many agencies push clients toward their preferred platform, we believe in matching the platform to the project's unique needs.

Remember that good design and development principles apply regardless of the platform. Success comes not from choosing the "best" CMS, but from selecting the one that best aligns with your team's capabilities, project requirements, and long-term goals.

Need help making your decision? Our team can provide a detailed analysis of your specific needs and help you choose the right platform for your project. Contact us to discuss your requirements and see demonstrations of how each platform could serve your specific use case.