Growth & Strategy
Personas
SaaS & Startup
Time to ROI
Medium-term (3-6 months)
After 7 years of building websites as a freelancer, I've had the same conversation with startup founders dozens of times. It always starts the same way: "We need a website that our marketing team can actually update without bothering our developers every time we want to change a headline."
Sound familiar? You're probably stuck in the same WordPress trap I was in for years - watching CTOs insist on keeping complex content management systems while marketing teams desperately need the velocity to ship landing pages daily. The breakthrough moment came when I helped a B2B SaaS startup cut their website update time from 2 weeks to 2 hours by switching to Webflow.
But here's the thing: choosing between Webflow and Framer isn't just about features or pricing. It's about understanding that your business website is a marketing asset, not a product asset. And like any asset, it needs to live where the velocity is needed most.
In this playbook, you'll learn:
Why most startups make the wrong platform choice (and waste months)
My real-world framework for choosing between Webflow and Framer
The migration playbook that actually works (based on dozens of client projects)
When to choose design differentiation over content management
How to avoid the expensive mistakes that derail platform migrations
This isn't another generic platform comparison. This is the framework I wish I had when I was debating whether to move my clients away from WordPress. Website development shouldn't be a bottleneck for your marketing team.
Industry Reality
What every startup has been told about platform choice
If you've researched this topic, you've probably read the same recycled advice everywhere. The industry consensus goes something like this:
"Webflow is for marketing sites, Framer is for design portfolios" - This oversimplification ignores how modern startups actually use their websites
"WordPress gives you more control" - Control that requires developer intervention for basic changes isn't really control
"Choose based on your technical skills" - This misses the point entirely about who actually needs to use the platform
"No-code platforms are limiting" - Usually said by developers who never have to update landing pages at 9 PM before a product launch
"Start simple, upgrade later" - Migration debt is real, and "later" often means "never"
This conventional wisdom exists because most platform comparisons are written by developers or agencies trying to justify their existence. They focus on technical capabilities instead of business outcomes.
The reality? Most startups need marketing velocity, not technical complexity. When your competitor can ship landing pages daily while you're waiting two weeks for developer bandwidth, technical superiority becomes irrelevant.
Here's what the generic advice misses: the platform choice isn't about features or pricing. It's about who controls the website and how fast they can move. When marketing teams can't execute because they're dependent on engineering sprints, you've chosen the wrong tool.
The shift happens when companies realize their website should live where the velocity is needed most: with the marketing team, not buried in engineering backlogs.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
I've been having this same debate for 7 years, and it finally came to a head with a B2B SaaS client who was hemorrhaging opportunities because of their website bottleneck.
The situation was classic startup dysfunction: brilliant product, growing user base, but their marketing site was stuck in WordPress hell. Every landing page required a developer. Every copy change needed a sprint. Their competitor was launching targeted campaigns weekly while they were waiting for "the next deployment window."
The breaking point came during their Series A fundraising. They needed investor-specific landing pages, case study updates, and pricing changes - all within 48 hours. Their CTO estimated 2 weeks minimum. Their competitor closed two deals while they were still debating whether to hire a WordPress developer or rebuild everything.
That's when they called me. But here's the thing - I wasn't originally a no-code advocate. For the first few years of my freelance career, I was firmly in the WordPress camp. "More control," I told clients. "Better for SEO," I rationalized. "More developer-friendly," I convinced myself.
The wake-up call came from watching my clients' marketing teams suffer. I was essentially training world-class sales reps (their websites) to do door-to-door sales in empty neighborhoods (no marketing velocity). Beautiful websites that nobody could update fast enough to matter.
The pattern was always the same: Launch a gorgeous WordPress site, celebrate for two weeks, then watch marketing teams get frustrated because changing a headline required a developer, a staging environment, and a deployment window. Meanwhile, competitors using Webflow or Framer were shipping new campaigns daily.
That's when I realized I was solving the wrong problem. The question isn't "Which platform has better features?" It's "Which platform helps your marketing team move faster?"
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
After migrating dozens of client websites and testing every possible configuration, here's the framework I actually use when advising startups on platform choice.
The Velocity Test: I start with one simple question - who needs to update your website most frequently? If the answer is "marketing team," and they're not technical, WordPress is automatically disqualified. If they are technical and need maximum design flexibility, Framer wins. If they need robust content management with marketing autonomy, Webflow wins.
My Decision Framework in Practice:
Choose Framer when:
Design differentiation is your competitive advantage (especially for design-forward SaaS)
You need to go from concept to live in days, not weeks
Your team values animation and interaction over content management depth
You're building primarily marketing sites (under 20 pages)
Choose Webflow when:
You're building beyond 20+ pages with complex content relationships
You need robust CMS capabilities for blogs, resources, or case studies
Your marketing team needs full autonomy without design constraints
Custom integrations and automation workflows are part of your roadmap
The Migration Process I Actually Use:
Step 1: Audit Current Bottlenecks - Track how long website changes actually take from request to live. Most startups are shocked when they realize simple updates take 2-3 weeks.
Step 2: Test with a Landing Page - Before migrating everything, build one campaign landing page in both platforms. See which your team actually uses and updates.
Step 3: Migration Strategy - Start with new pages, not existing ones. Let the old site handle established content while new campaigns use the new platform.
Step 4: Team Training - The platform is only as good as your team's ability to use it. Budget time for proper onboarding.
The key insight from all these migrations: marketing velocity beats technical perfection every time. Your competitor shipping imperfect landing pages weekly will outperform your perfect site that updates monthly.
Migration Timeline
Most startups can migrate their core marketing pages in 4-6 weeks if they focus on new content rather than recreating everything pixel-perfect
Team Autonomy
The platform that your marketing team actually uses daily matters more than the one with the most features or lowest cost
Design vs Content
Framer excels when your design is your differentiator. Webflow wins when content marketing and CMS management drive your growth
Hidden Costs
Factor in team training time, template costs, and integration requirements. The cheapest platform becomes expensive if it slows down your marketing velocity
The results from platform migrations speak for themselves, but they're not what you'd expect.
Velocity Improvements: Teams that switched to appropriate no-code platforms saw website update times drop from an average of 2 weeks to same-day deployment. Marketing teams that were previously bottlenecked by developer availability could suddenly ship campaigns in hours, not sprints.
SEO Impact: Contrary to WordPress loyalist fears, SEO performance remained strong across all migrated sites. In many cases, it improved due to faster page load speeds (no plugin bloat) and more frequent content updates (because marketers could actually update content).
Team Satisfaction: The most dramatic change was in team dynamics. Marketing teams went from feeling dependent and frustrated to autonomous and experimental. Developer teams stopped being bottlenecked by "change this headline" requests and could focus on actual product development.
Business Impact: The SaaS client who triggered this entire exploration saw their campaign launch frequency increase from monthly to weekly. Their competitor advantage shifted from "better product" to "faster marketing execution." They closed their Series A two months earlier than projected, partly because they could respond to investor feedback with updated messaging within hours, not weeks.
But here's what surprised me most: the platform choice became less important than the team's ability to move fast. Teams using Framer effectively outperformed teams struggling with Webflow, and vice versa. The tool matters less than the velocity it enables.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
After 7 years and dozens of platform migrations, here are the insights that actually matter:
Platform features matter less than team velocity - The marketing team that can ship daily beats the one with the "better" platform updating monthly
Migration debt is real - "We'll switch later" often means "never." Choose the right platform early or budget significant time for migration
Developer preference isn't always business optimal - What's easier for your engineering team might be terrible for your marketing velocity
Test with campaigns, not websites - Build one landing page in each platform and see which your team actually uses before committing to a full migration
Training investment pays off - The best platform is worthless if your team doesn't know how to use it effectively
Design flexibility vs content management is the real trade-off - Most other factors are secondary to this fundamental choice
SEO fears are mostly unfounded - Modern no-code platforms handle SEO basics well, and frequent content updates often improve rankings
The biggest lesson: your website is a marketing asset, not a product asset. Treat it like one. The platform that enables your marketing team to move fastest usually wins, regardless of technical superiority.
When in doubt, ask yourself: "Which platform helps us ship campaigns faster?" The answer to that question matters more than features, pricing, or developer preferences.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS startups specifically:
Choose Framer if product design is your competitive advantage
Choose Webflow if content marketing drives your SaaS growth
Prioritize marketing team autonomy over developer preferences
Budget 4-6 weeks for proper migration and team training
For your Ecommerce store
For e-commerce businesses:
Consider Shopify with custom themes before no-code platforms
Use Webflow/Framer for marketing pages, not product catalogs
Focus on conversion optimization over platform perfection
Test campaign landing pages before full migration