If you are considering moving from Webflow to a headless setup, this write-up breaks down a real-world workflow based on a launch conversation and production experience.
It is especially relevant if you are searching for:
- Webflow to Sanity migration
- Next.js headless CMS setup
- React Next.js developer for CMS implementation
The stack discussed:
- Frontend: React + Next.js
- CMS: Sanity (headless)
- Hosting: Vercel
The site is reported to be handling around 30,000 monthly visitors with a stable workflow for publishing content.
Why Move Away from Webflow?
Webflow is fast to start with, but teams often outgrow it when they want:
- Full control over frontend architecture
- More flexible CMS modeling
- Better developer workflows
- Faster iteration with AI-assisted coding in production
In this case, the full setup was moved out of Webflow and rebuilt in code, including design and copy implementation.
Who This Setup Is For
This setup is best for:
- Teams that want marketing-friendly editing with engineering-grade frontend control
- Startups scaling content and landing pages beyond visual-builder limits
- Companies that need faster iteration across blog, docs, and campaign pages
- Founders looking for a developer who can build a CMS workflow for marketing teams
Chosen Stack and Why
React + Next.js for Frontend
The decision here was practical:
- React is widely adopted
- LLMs are strong at generating and refactoring React
- Next.js gives production-ready routing, SSR/ISR, and deployment ergonomics
For teams using AI heavily in build workflows, this combination reduces implementation friction.
Sanity as Headless CMS
Sanity was selected because:
- It is battle-tested
- Editorial UI is familiar for non-developers
- It supports fully programmable schema and studio customization
The key result: team members could start using the content studio without deep onboarding.
Vercel for Hosting
Vercel was chosen for deployment simplicity and reliability with Next.js projects.
Reported setup in the discussion:
- Team-level plans were being used
- Hosting overhead remained low at current traffic
- Operational flow stayed simple for content and code shipping
What “Headless CMS” Means (In Plain Terms)
A traditional CMS setup combines content management and frontend rendering in one system.
A headless setup separates concerns:
- CMS manages content only
- Frontend app renders content independently
So instead of editing pages directly in the same website builder, content is managed in one tool (Sanity) and rendered in another (Next.js).
CMS Workflow: How Publishing Works
The discussed publishing flow is straightforward:
- Open Sanity Studio (
/studio) - Create or edit a document (e.g., blog post)
- Fill fields (rich text, meta description, etc.)
- Click publish
- Content appears on the live site
Important detail: this flow can be configured without redeploying the full app for each content update.
Tradeoffs and Current Limitation Mentioned
One current tradeoff noted in the conversation:
- Publishing is live immediately
- A separate preview/staging gate for content was not yet enabled
That is solvable. You can add preview modes and staged approval workflows in Sanity + Next.js if your team needs editorial QA before public release.
Cost Snapshot Mentioned in Discussion
The conversation references seat-based pricing for tools (Sanity + Vercel team usage), with combined monthly operational cost around a few hundred dollars for the team setup.
The exact amount can vary by:
- Team size
- Build minutes and bandwidth
- Feature usage
- Enterprise requirements
Treat this as directional, not a universal benchmark.
Is This Better Than Webflow for Everyone?
Not always.
This approach is strongest when you need:
- Engineering-level control
- Structured content across multiple page types
- AI-assisted build workflows in code
- Scalable architecture beyond visual builder limits
Webflow can still be the better option for teams prioritizing speed with less engineering ownership.
Practical Recommendation
If you are currently in Webflow and planning a migration, start with this sequence:
- Rebuild one section first (blog or resources)
- Set up Sanity schemas for content types
- Render content in Next.js with SEO metadata parity
- Keep slug structure stable during migration
- Add preview workflow before scaling editors
This gives you a controlled transition rather than a risky full cutover.
FAQ: Webflow to Sanity + Next.js Migration
Can this setup rank well on Google?
Yes, if technical SEO is handled correctly: stable URLs, metadata parity, schema markup, sitemap, internal linking, and strong content quality.
Is this setup friendly for non-technical marketing teams?
Yes. Sanity Studio is editor-friendly. Teams can publish and manage structured content without touching the codebase.
Do content changes require full redeploys?
Not always. Content publishing can be configured to update directly while code changes follow normal CI/CD.
Is it better than Webflow in every case?
No. It is better when you need frontend flexibility and custom architecture. Webflow can still be the right fit for simpler team workflows.
Final Takeaway
A Webflow-to-headless migration can be simple operationally if architecture decisions are clear:
- Next.js for rendering and performance
- Sanity for content operations
- Vercel for deployment workflow
For teams already shipping with code, this can improve flexibility and long-term scalability without making daily publishing harder.
Related pages: