AI & Automation
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Short-term (< 3 months)
Three months ago, I was all-in on Framer for client projects. The design freedom, the animations, the ability to create something that looked nothing like every other startup's cookie-cutter site - it felt like the future of web design.
Then a B2B SaaS client asked for something that seemed simple: "Can we make the testimonials pull from our CRM automatically?"
That question sent me down a rabbit hole that completely changed how I think about marketing websites. Because here's the thing - Framer's dynamic content support is limited, and that limitation taught me something valuable about what marketing sites actually need.
Most people see Framer's content limitations as a weakness. I learned it's actually a feature. Here's what you'll discover in this playbook:
Why Framer's approach to dynamic content makes you build better sites
The specific workarounds I developed for dynamic content needs
When to use Framer vs when to switch to something else
My decision framework for marketing site architecture
Real examples from client projects and what worked
If you're considering Framer for your next project or hitting walls with its content capabilities, this playbook will save you weeks of headaches. Let's dive into what I learned about building websites that actually convert.
Reality Check
What the design community won't tell you about Framer
The design community loves Framer. Twitter is full of designers sharing beautiful Framer sites, Figma-to-Framer workflows, and "look what I built in 30 minutes" posts. The narrative is simple: Framer gives you design freedom without code.
Here's what everyone talks about:
Visual design flexibility - Create layouts that would take days in WordPress
Animation capabilities - Micro-interactions that make sites feel premium
Figma integration - Seamless handoff from design to development
Speed of deployment - Go from concept to live in hours
Mobile responsiveness - Built-in responsive design tools
This conventional wisdom exists because it's partially true. Framer excels at creating visually stunning, fast-loading marketing sites. The design community gravitates toward tools that make their work look impressive.
But here's where the industry narrative falls short: it focuses on the creation process, not the maintenance reality. Most Framer advocates are designing for agencies, personal brands, or one-off projects. They're not dealing with the ongoing content management needs of growing businesses.
The gap between "beautiful demo" and "scalable business website" is where most Framer projects either succeed brilliantly or fail quietly. Understanding this gap is crucial for making the right platform choice.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
My wake-up call came from a client whose business had grown faster than their content management needs. They were a B2B SaaS company targeting HR departments, and their original site was built on a WordPress theme that looked like every other SaaS site in 2022.
The founder wanted something different. "Make us stand out," he said. "Everyone in our space looks the same." This was exactly the type of project where Framer shines - creating a unique visual identity that cuts through the noise.
I built them a beautiful site with custom animations, scroll-triggered elements, and a layout that felt fresh in their industry. The feedback was incredible. Their conversion rates improved, and they started getting compliments from prospects about their site design.
Then the growth challenges started. Their marketing team wanted to A/B test different case studies. Sales needed to update customer logos quarterly. The CEO wanted testimonials to rotate based on the visitor's company size. Customer success wanted to showcase different metrics for different personas.
Every request bumped up against Framer's content limitations. I found myself manually updating testimonials, recreating components for A/B tests, and building workarounds for what should have been simple content management.
The beautiful site had become a maintenance bottleneck. The marketing team couldn't move fast because every change required my involvement. What was supposed to be a growth enabler had become a growth limiter.
That's when I realized the real question isn't "Can Framer do dynamic content?" It's "What kind of dynamic content do you actually need, and is there a better way to solve that problem?"
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
Instead of fighting Framer's limitations, I developed a framework that works with them. The key insight: most "dynamic content" requests are actually requests for better content organization and faster updates.
Step 1: Content Audit and Classification
I started categorizing content needs into three buckets:
Static-Dynamic: Content that changes rarely (quarterly case studies, annual reports)
Semi-Dynamic: Content that updates monthly (testimonials, team members, metrics)
True Dynamic: Content that changes daily or is user-specific (personalization, real-time data)
Step 2: The Hybrid Architecture Solution
For my SaaS client, I rebuilt their site using a hybrid approach. The main marketing pages stayed in Framer for design freedom, but I integrated specific sections using embedded solutions:
Testimonials: Integrated Testimonial.to widget that pulls from their CRM
Case Studies: Used Notion as a headless CMS with public API integration
Team Pages: Built custom components with Airtable backend
Metrics Dashboard: Embedded ChartJS widgets pulling from their analytics
Step 3: The Content Update Workflow
I created a simple system where the marketing team could update most content without touching Framer:
Testimonials update automatically from their customer success workflow
Case studies are managed in Notion with a simple template
Team updates happen in Airtable with photo upload capabilities
Metrics refresh daily from their data warehouse
Step 4: When to Migrate Away
I developed clear criteria for when Framer becomes the wrong choice. If you need any of these, consider alternatives:
User-specific content personalization
Complex form workflows with conditional logic
E-commerce functionality beyond basic landing pages
Multi-language sites with complex content management
Integration with complex marketing automation platforms
The result? A site that maintains Framer's visual appeal while solving the dynamic content problem through smart integrations rather than fighting the platform's limitations.
Hybrid Approach
Use Framer for design, integrate external tools for dynamic content management
Content Classification
Separate static-dynamic, semi-dynamic, and true dynamic content needs
Update Workflows
Create systems where teams can update content without designer involvement
Migration Criteria
Know when Framer limitations require platform changes
The hybrid approach delivered exactly what the client needed. Their marketing team regained autonomy over content updates, while the site maintained its distinctive visual identity that set them apart from competitors.
Measurable outcomes:
Content update time reduced from 2-3 days to same-day
Marketing team independence increased - 80% of updates happen without designer involvement
Site performance remained excellent - 95+ Lighthouse scores
Conversion rates improved 15% due to more relevant, timely content
The most unexpected outcome was how this approach influenced their content strategy. Because updating content became frictionless, they started experimenting more with messaging, testing different case studies for different audiences, and keeping testimonials fresh.
This experience taught me that platform limitations often force better solutions than unlimited flexibility. The constraint of working within Framer's capabilities led to a more thoughtful content architecture than if I'd started with a fully dynamic CMS.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
Here are the key insights from implementing dynamic content solutions in Framer:
Constraints breed creativity - Framer's limitations forced me to think differently about content management, leading to better solutions
Hybrid beats pure - Combining Framer's design strengths with external tools for content management works better than fighting the platform
Most "dynamic" content isn't truly dynamic - Many requests can be solved with better workflows rather than real-time data integration
Team autonomy matters more than technical perfection - A solution that lets marketing move fast beats a technically elegant solution that creates bottlenecks
Know your migration triggers - Having clear criteria for when to switch platforms prevents prolonged frustration
Performance doesn't have to suffer - Smart integrations can maintain site speed while adding functionality
Visual identity and functionality can coexist - You don't have to choose between distinctive design and practical content management
What I'd do differently: I'd start every Framer project with the content audit now. Understanding dynamic content needs upfront prevents mid-project surprises and sets better expectations with clients about what's possible within the platform.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups using Framer:
Start with content audit before design
Use external tools for testimonials and case studies
Integrate analytics dashboards via embeds
Plan migration path for complex functionality
For your Ecommerce store
For e-commerce stores considering Framer:
Use only for marketing pages, not product catalogs
Integrate inventory displays through third-party widgets
Embed customer reviews from external platforms
Consider Shopify + Framer landing page combination