In a previous article (only available in French), I shared my move from WooCommerce to Shopify for e-commerce. That thinking about how my tools evolve continues here with my approach to CMSes — content management systems.
To set the stage: according to W3Techs, WordPress powers about 40 % of all websites — nearly 60 % of the CMS market, well ahead of its nearest rival. Stepping away from a giant like that is no small thing. In practice, I haven’t started a new WordPress project in four years; an official decision has now been made, though: there won’t be any more. What follows comes from my own observations, enriched by conversations with colleagues and friends in the field.
WordPress: a historic platform with its limits
WordPress has been around since 2003. Originally built as a blogging engine, it grew over the years into a general-purpose CMS through a multitude of extensions and themes. That gradual evolution left an architecture that still carries the marks of its origins.
In the early days, I was genuinely enthusiastic about it. Back then, sites were still being built with Mambo, PHP-Nuke, or SPIP — WordPress felt like a breath of fresh air. Yeah, I’m that old: the generation of Internet pioneers, of forums like SMF, phpBB, vBulletin… It doesn’t make anyone feel younger. It’s precisely because I believed in it early that stepping away today isn’t a whim: it’s the result of years of use, projects, and comparisons with other tools.
Its popularity has a downside: as the most widely used platform, it’s also the most targeted. Security becomes a constant concern, which often means stacking protection plugins — which can paradoxically widen the attack surface.
Having a site defaced because of a poorly built plugin: I’ve been there. Putting it back online from a backup, without knowing whether that same backup will be defaced again tomorrow — that’s suspense I can live without. Day-to-day work already brings enough challenges. I don’t need to run across hot coals just to feel alive.
The admin interface has grown heavier over time: update notices, plugin suggestions, premium upsells… That overload can throw off clients who simply want to manage their content. As an agency, it’s awkward to hand over a dashboard full of ads to “go Pro.”
From the first login, WordPress can feel heavy to a newcomer — a real Rube Goldberg machine. The left-hand menu is packed with sections that can intimidate less technical users. And the interfaces don’t always line up: a builder like Elementor or Divi drops you into another universe entirely, which is dizzying and disorienting.
WordPress isn’t just plugins: it’s plugins for plugins. You’re literally playing 4D chess. Elementor, for example, adds block-based page building — and a crowd of third-party vendors ship their own blocks, or Elementor alternatives. It’s impressive… and a sign that something’s off in the matrix. WordPress has limits; the near-absence of limits at the plugin layer is a paradox I still struggle to explain.
WordPress has limits; the near-absence of limits at the plugin layer is a paradox I still struggle to explain.
WordPress is often sold as free, which is true on the surface. But bare WordPress doesn’t do much. A decent theme or a builder like Elementor costs money. Every carefully chosen extension may be free but limited, or paid across several tiers. Paywalls show up all over the interface, and the experience feels fragmented.
Multilingual support illustrates the limit perfectly. A serious multilingual site without a third-party, unofficial extension is basically unthinkable. The most popular solution is expensive, with add-ons that aren’t always consistent — which hurts the developer experience, and especially the content editor’s: the client. For a feature this essential today, depending on a third-party solution simply isn’t very serious.
Extension quality: a publisher’s perspective
I’m a plugin publisher myself, which gives me a view of both sides of the coin.
The WordPress marketplace is vast, and quality is uneven: plugins that are outdated or shaky, banners forever pushing a Pro upgrade. WordPress feels a bit like the Wild West that way.
Some modern CMSes, by contrast, enforce review processes closer to mobile app stores. Not just anyone gets in: rules, checks, rejection when standards aren’t met, fixes before you can resubmit.
Those platforms have clear guidelines and strict categorization. A settings screen has to live in the right place; admin UIs have to stay coherent. If an extension turns problematic, greedy, or unsafe, the community and store admins react. The ecosystem stays more professional and more consistent.
License management: the upside of centralization
The modern CMSes I use centralize sales of their commercial extensions. Licenses follow the same model and are paid in the same place — which simplifies my internal operations considerably.
With WordPress, every commercial publisher has their own platform: multiple vendors, invoices in different currencies on a single project, uneven levels of detail. An accounting nightmare. It doesn’t hit my clients directly, but that kind of uniformity has real value for how efficiently I can work.
Governance and ecosystem health
The recent controversy around WordPress governance also fed into my thinking. Long-time contributors saw their accounts disabled after discussing alternatives, including the idea of a fork — an independent copy of the code that would evolve on its own. That episode raises questions about the long-term health of the ecosystem and how tolerant the platform is of diverse approaches. I prefer platforms where innovation and constructive debate are encouraged rather than constrained.
My expertise: PHP and Laravel
I specialize mainly in PHP and Laravel. That expertise naturally shapes my choices. When I evaluate a platform, I look for tools that fit my stack and the way I work.
Craft CMS, Statamic, and Filament are natural fits. Statamic and Filament already run on Laravel; Craft CMS 5, the current release, still runs on Yii. That proximity — PHP, and increasingly Laravel — lets me build custom features without multiplying technologies.
For example, for a project that needs both a website and a mobile app, my old reflex would have been a CMS for the marketing site — WordPress or Craft depending on the need — and a separate Laravel app to power the mobile app through an API. With Statamic already on Laravel, and Craft CMS 6 heading that way, the same foundation can serve the site and the app, without needless duplication or technical inconsistency.
Craft CMS: my primary choice
Craft CMS speaks directly to the challenges I’ve outlined.
Built-in security. Sensible defaults are on out of the box — CSRF protection, user enumeration prevention, rigorous input validation. You don’t need extra extensions to reach a solid security baseline.
Native multilingual. Language handling sits at the core of the system, with no third-party extension. Each language is a full site in its own right, with real flexibility over content structure.
Focused interface. The control panel is clean and centered on what matters. No constant nags, no endless upsells — just the tools to manage content. All of my Craft clients have quickly understood and adopted that clear, simple interface.
Modern workflows. Staging and production move together, with solid tools for config and content migrations. Development fits naturally with current JavaScript frameworks and modern build tooling.
Long-term vision. Craft CMS 5 is the current version, still built on Yii. Craft CMS 6, already in alpha with an official release expected this year, will move to Laravel — and that genuinely excites me. The CMS I know best will join the framework I use most to build solutions.
Proven experience. I’ve worked with Craft since version 2. It has evolved well and still impresses me. Having direct Discord access to the development team — and even the founders — is pleasant and reassuring. I know this CMS inside out, even if I still discover new strengths regularly.
What really changes the client experience isn’t only the interface — it’s how the site is built.
With WordPress, you often end up with a mash-up of plugins: a Frankenstein monster. With Craft, it’s a coherent, deliberate approach from the start.
Statamic: my secondary choice
Statamic is my secondary choice mainly because I know it less well than Craft, but its philosophy appeals to me. A different approach, just as modern: it can run entirely on files (flat-file), without a traditional database, or use a database when needed. Already grounded in Laravel — as Craft CMS 6 soon will be — it lines up with my day-to-day stack and a contemporary design philosophy.
What I especially like is its slightly punk image — an alternative approach that isn’t afraid to question established conventions.
Static sites: Nuxt and SvelteKit
For some projects, even a CMS is too much. When a site needs little — or no — admin panel, I prefer static approaches with frameworks like Nuxt or SvelteKit.
Those solutions suit brochure sites that rarely change, landing pages, projects where updates go through Québec Studio rather than the client, or short-lived sites that don’t need much editing flexibility.
The main upside is simplicity: no database, no admin, just code that generates fast static files. For clients who don’t need to touch their content regularly, it’s light, performant, and economical.
Continuity for my WordPress clients
This shift doesn’t mean I’m abandoning my WordPress clients. I’ll keep maintaining their existing sites and the minor adjustments they need to keep running well.
I won’t, however, evolve those sites in major ways, or start new projects on WordPress. For significant changes or new features, I’ll discuss the options — migration to Craft or Statamic depending on the needs, or a handoff to another developer if that’s their preference. Above all, I want to keep my clients: I’ll do everything I can to support them through the transition. If they choose to leave or keep their site as is, I’ll respect that decision and make the move easy.
WordPress can still be a fit in some contexts: modest budgets, simple needs covered by existing extensions, teams that prefer a gentler learning curve. But Québec Studio has removed it from the toolkit for new projects, for the reasons laid out here.
Conclusion
I’m not out to denigrate WordPress. Plenty of agencies do wonderful work with it: they’ve specialized, defined a winning recipe that’s simple for their clients, and it works. I simply don’t share the same appreciation. As a full-stack developer, I prefer CMSes built for customization and adding features — without stacking plugins I don’t really master, that slip out of my hands as soon as I need to go further, and that end up boxing in my creative drive. Adding a feature can break a plugin or duplicate structures; in short, it’s often better not to try to improve them. And if you’re going to build alongside them anyway, you might as well do it in an ecosystem that allows that from the start.
Technology moves fast. WordPress has stood the test of time, and it still powers countless sites — that’s no small feat. But for me, it’s no longer the foundation I want to build on. Its architecture still carries the marks of the 2000s: it holds up, it has proven itself, and yet it no longer matches how I design and develop today. That’s not a judgment on people who thrive with it; it’s simply my choice of tool. Craft CMS and Statamic have become my defaults for new projects, because they fit that vision better.
What matters is choosing the right platform for each project — based on technical needs, budget, skills, and long-term goals. That’s the pragmatic approach I keep applying for my clients.