Selecting the right digital platform—whether a content management system (CMS) like WordPress or a more complex digital experience platform (DXP)—is about far more than just picking a name. While WordPress and Umbraco are strong examples of each type of solution, the real challenge lies in understanding the fundamental differences between a CMS and a DXP and how each can meet specific business needs. In reality, a CMS is not fully comparable to a DXP; each has distinct purposes, strengths, and limitations.
At AdTelic, we believe that choosing a platform should be grounded in your organization’s requirements, budget, and goals—not driven by market trends or platform marketing. With nearly two decades of experience in WordPress and over a decade in Umbraco, we’ve seen the hype around terms like “headless,” “composable architecture,” and “microservices” often cloud the decision-making process. Instead of focusing on buzzwords, our approach prioritizes practical considerations that make a difference in real-world implementations.
How to Choose a Digital Experience Platform (DXP)
We outline key factors to consider when evaluating any CMS or DXP, beyond the surface-level marketing myths. From time to market to team compatibility and total cost of ownership, these insights will help guide a decision that aligns with your business needs, regardless of platform names or industry trends.
Time to Market or TTM
For many organizations, time to market (TTM) is a critical consideration when selecting a digital platform. The need to launch quickly can significantly influence whether a content management system (CMS) or a digital experience platform (DXP) is the right choice. Understanding how TTM impacts your digital strategy can help clarify which platform best aligns with your business goals.
Typically, CMS platforms are simpler to implement, offering faster setups and fewer dependencies. For example, WordPress’s ease of use, extensive plugin ecosystem, and straightforward configuration enable organizations to launch new sites or features rapidly. Think hours and days, not weeks and months. For organizations aiming for a quick turnaround, a CMS provides an efficient solution without the complex integration requirements of a DXP.
DXPs, on the other hand, often require more time and resources to implement due to their multi-functional capabilities. The quickest we’ve seen a DXP implementation from start to finish is about 9 months. The integration of content management with other tools like customer relationship management (CRM), marketing automation, and data analytics systems adds layers of complexity. For organizations seeking a robust, multi-faceted digital experience, a DXP’s extended implementation time may be justified by the long-term benefits. However, it’s essential to weigh whether the added functionality aligns with the immediate needs and timeline.
TTM considerations should also factor in internal decision-making processes. Some organizations face delays because stakeholders want to implement a fully-featured experience from day one. Balancing stakeholder expectations with realistic timelines is key. A phased approach—starting with essential CMS functions and adding features over time—can often help meet immediate goals without overwhelming development and marketing teams.
When selecting a digital platform, time to market (TTM) is often a top priority. For organizations aiming to launch quickly—whether for a product, campaign, or full website—content management systems (CMS) like WordPress typically offer the simplest path to a fast launch. But beyond TTM, it’s equally important to assess the pace of change your organization can realistically sustain after going live, which we can think of as your Endurance to Market (ETM).
Platforms with quick setup times, like WordPress, are generally well-suited for companies that need an efficient, flexible digital presence. With its extensive plugin ecosystem and user-friendly design, a CMS allows for frequent updates and adaptations without requiring extensive technical resources. This makes CMSs ideal for businesses with agile teams, frequent marketing campaigns, or a need for regular content updates.
However, when an organization’s needs extend beyond basic CMS capabilities, a digital experience platform (DXP) or a highly customized CMS implementation may be necessary. These solutions can support sophisticated, multi-layered digital experiences but typically require more time and planning for initial implementation. For organizations with a slower pace of change, a more complex platform can deliver long-term value but demands sustained attention and resources to manage, maintain, and optimize integrations over time.
Another crucial consideration is your organization’s ability to adapt to ongoing updates and features. In many cases, companies overestimate the speed at which they can adopt and manage advanced capabilities. Launching a high-powered DXP all at once may create delays if your team isn’t equipped for the complexity. A phased approach—introducing core CMS features first, followed by more advanced elements—can help maintain a realistic TTM without overwhelming internal teams.
Choosing a platform that aligns with both TTM and ETM considerations ensures that your organization not only launches on time but can also keep up with the demands of operating, evolving, and maximizing the platform’s value. For organizations with high adaptability, a flexible CMS may be the right fit. Meanwhile, those with structured, slower adaptation processes may find greater benefits in a robust DXP—provided timelines and team capacity align with its demands. Balancing these factors is essential for a sustainable, successful digital platform strategy.
Time on the Market
While time to market (TTM) is essential for getting a digital experience launched, it’s equally important to consider the Time on Market—how long the platform will need to stay relevant and functional for your business goals. In this context, Time on Market is about understanding the longevity of a digital experience and whether the selected platform aligns with that lifespan.
For short-term projects or disposable digital experiences, a traditional CMS is often the best choice. Campaign-specific microsites, temporary content hubs, or seasonal promotions, for instance, may only be needed for a few months. Implementing a CMS like WordPress for these projects can deliver the required functionality without the commitment to complex, ongoing maintenance. This is because CMSs generally require less investment in long-term development and are easier to sunset when no longer needed.
However, for projects intended to be in place for several years, durability and scalability become significant factors. In these cases, investing in a platform that can grow and adapt with your organization over time is key. Long-term digital experiences, such as multi-channel customer portals or content-rich sites with ongoing personalization requirements, may justify the investment in a digital experience platform (DXP) or a CMS with more advanced capabilities. These platforms are built to support deeper integrations, stronger security features, and larger content ecosystems, ensuring that the platform remains sustainable over a longer period.
Choosing the right platform for the intended Time on Market also helps to avoid unnecessary investment in features or capabilities that may never be utilized. For instance, organizations sometimes select a powerful DXP for a temporary campaign site, only to find that much of its advanced functionality remains unused. Conversely, a CMS without scalability might need costly overhauls if the project later expands beyond its initial scope.
Aligning your platform choice with the expected Time on Market allows your organization to balance functionality, cost, and maintenance needs effectively. A CMS is often ideal for shorter-term needs, providing a nimble, cost-effective solution. Meanwhile, for long-term digital experiences that require continual evolution, a platform with robust, adaptable capabilities ensures your investment remains valuable and future-ready.
Keep in mind that your digital strategy should plan for and include temporary or disposable digital experiences. We’ve seen large organizations adopt a “let a thousand flowers bloom” approach to campaigns, events, conference sites only to later regret allowing the inevitable brand fragmentation, borked information architecture, redundant technology, multitude of technology stacks, out dated tech, that leads to customer complaints like “I can’t find anything.” Which totally makes sense if your organization has dozens of domains and no federated search. And of course how can marketing report any meaningful analytics if each campaign is siloed off? So, while it’s tempting to think that spawning off a new Umbraco or WordPress site for each new campaign makes sense because “We need to go fast” there is often real downside to this approach.
Total Cost of Ownership
When selecting a digital platform, understanding the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) is essential to making a choice that aligns with your organization’s budget and long-term goals. Cost considerations go beyond the initial price tag to include a wide range of ongoing expenses, from implementation and maintenance to training and support. By evaluating TCO holistically, organizations can avoid unexpected expenses and ensure a sustainable investment.
Initial Purchase and Licensing Fees
The first cost factor is the platform’s initial purchase or licensing fee. While open-source CMSs like WordPress and Umbraco offer free or low-cost entry points, enterprise-level platforms may come with high upfront fees. Proprietary DXPs, for example, may charge based on traffic, revenue, or other metrics, which can quickly add up, particularly for larger organizations with high engagement. For example some DXPs are priced based on page views. This is often problematic for associations because they tend to create tons of content and drive lots of traffic but their business models are 30% events or conference driven. In other words, for the association business model pricing based on traffic is a harder sell because traffic does not correspond to revenue.
Implementation and Integration Costs
Implementation often represents a significant part of TCO, particularly for complex platforms. For a straightforward CMS deployment, implementation costs may be minimal if in-house teams handle basic configuration. However, advanced platforms that require custom development or integrations with other systems (such as CRM, ERP, or marketing automation) will incur higher implementation costs. Additionally, complex projects may require third-party consultants or agency support, which can drive up costs substantially. When pricing out your DXP implementation consider what its going to take to get your systems integrated. Will you need to hire an AMS expert and an ERP expert? There is a cost to integrating your DXP with all the systems that run your organization.
Maintenance and Operational Expenses
Ongoing maintenance is another critical cost consideration. Every platform requires updates, but the complexity and frequency of these updates can vary. A CMS with frequent plugin and theme updates, for instance, may need regular attention from a developer to maintain stability and security. DXPs, with their complex architecture, typically have higher maintenance costs due to the need for specialized technical skills and dedicated IT resources. Optimizely for example releases new features, bug fixes, and security updates almost weekly. So, create a plan and a budget for implementing updates. We generally recommend budgeting for at least 25% of your initial implementation budget on a year over year basis for keeping things updated.
Training and Upskilling
Training is a factor that’s often overlooked but can impact TCO significantly. While popular CMSs like WordPress have extensive online tutorials and resources, other platforms, especially enterprise-grade DXPs, require specialized training programs. Proprietary platforms offer paid certifications or formal training, which are an additional expense. Upskilling internal teams to manage these platforms or hiring skilled talent to fill in knowledge gaps can add both direct and indirect costs over time. We recommend pushing your DXP vendor to include training in your initial implementation. DXP vendors tend to be highly motived sales people who have “wiggle room” on costs like training, and conferences. You will have more leverage when quarter quotas are due or the new year is approaching.
Operational and Administrative Costs
Beyond technical maintenance, platforms come with day-to-day operational expenses. These might include costs for additional user licenses, content moderation, and administrative roles required to keep the platform running smoothly. Some DXPs include prices increases based on the number of editors. For organizations with stringent compliance requirements, ensuring proper data governance and security protocols can add further to these expenses.
Support and Assistance
Support costs vary depending on the platform’s complexity and the level of support required. Some CMSs offer community-driven support for free, while DXPs often require paid support packages or access to dedicated support teams. For businesses without in-house technical expertise, investing in robust support options is critical, particularly for mission-critical platforms that must remain operational around the clock.
Upgrades and Scalability
As organizations grow, so do their platform requirements. It’s important to consider the costs of future upgrades or expansions, particularly for platforms that scale based on user volume, traffic, or engagement. When selecting a platform, it’s worth assessing whether the pricing model is flexible enough to accommodate future growth or if scaling up will require a substantial cost increase.
Total Cost Summary
Evaluating TCO gives organizations a clearer picture of the platform’s financial demands over its lifecycle. While CMS platforms like WordPress generally offer lower TCO due to their simplicity and community support, they may still incur substantial costs depending on customization needs. DXPs and other enterprise-grade platforms, while feature-rich, demand a higher level of financial commitment in terms of ongoing maintenance, specialized support, and scalability.
By considering these various cost factors, organizations can select a platform that not only meets their current budget but also provides a sustainable solution as they grow and evolve.
Pricing Transparency
Transparency in pricing is a critical factor when selecting a digital platform, as it directly impacts budget planning and cost predictability. When evaluating options, organizations should look for platforms that offer clear and straightforward pricing models that align with their business needs and avoid unexpected expenses.
Clarity and Simplicity in Pricing
Pricing models vary widely across CMSs and DXPs, from one-time licensing fees to complex subscription or usage-based models. Open-source CMSs, like WordPress, generally provide transparent, predictable costs, often centered around hosting fees and optional plugins or themes. Proprietary DXPs, however, can introduce more complexity, especially if pricing is based on variables such as page views, storage, data usage, or even company revenue. Understanding these factors from the outset is essential to avoid cost escalations as your organization’s needs grow.
Pricing is a key area to press your DXP vendor and your stakeholders. We’ve seen major changes in the past 10 years on how DXPs are priced. The most impactful was the move to cloud based services rather than perpetual licensing. In other words most DXPs now price based on coupling of the software license to recurring revenue or subscription models. Keep in mind that pressure in the DXP market is very strong so the business side is changing quickly. Acquisitions are adding features and potentially new costs to customers. Optimizely recently acquired NetSpring for example and while there is no immediate change to the price of the DXP we know of it is very possible the cost of the acquisition will eventually get baked into the overall price of the DXP.
Aligning Pricing with Business Needs
A critical question to ask is whether the platform’s pricing model aligns with your business model. For instance, platforms that charge based on traffic or engagement may become costly for organizations with high volumes of content or large, engaged audiences. By contrast, revenue-based pricing models may be more suitable for eCommerce-focused businesses, where costs scale with income. Each pricing model has unique implications for different types of businesses, so evaluating compatibility is crucial to ensure that fees remain manageable as your organization grows.
Costs for Additional Features and Integrations
Some platforms, particularly DXPs and enterprise-level CMSs, often charge additional fees for premium features or advanced integrations. These could include enhanced security features, analytics modules, or marketing automation tools that may not be included in the base package. Organizations should evaluate whether these features are essential or if similar capabilities can be achieved through third-party plugins or integrations, especially on platforms with extensive marketplaces like WordPress. In the WordPress world most of the pricing is tied to managed services and hosting requirements. For example WordPress multisite implementations generally cost more to host. Other requirements like the ability to host a Node.js server alongside your WordPress install may come with additional costs. Comparing managed hosts side by side can be tedious, however most lever on a few keys areas: storage, traffic, and number of domains. In additional, most managed services will include SLAs, Web Application Firewalls (WAF), DDOS mitigation, backups, and staging, development, and live environments.
Scalability and Flexibility in Pricing
The ability to scale affordably is another key aspect of pricing transparency. Some platforms are designed to accommodate organizational growth without drastically increasing costs, while others may require significant investments to upgrade to higher service tiers or handle increased traffic. For instance, some platforms may offer a free or low-cost entry-level option but introduce substantial fees as usage grows. Assessing the scalability of the pricing model ensures that costs won’t spiral as your digital experience gains traction.
Avoiding Hidden Costs
In some cases, pricing can appear transparent initially but later reveal hidden costs. These might include fees for support, mandatory upgrades, or limits on data storage and transfer. Enterprise-grade platforms, in particular, may require paid support or charge for additional user licenses. To prevent surprise expenses, it’s important to ask vendors directly about potential hidden costs and clarify which features are included in the base price versus those that require additional fees. A simple example is what happens if traffic spikes? Will you be charged or forced into an upgrade if your traffic is higher than you expected?
Pricing transparency is ensuring the platform’s cost structure aligns with your organization’s financial expectations and growth trajectory. By seeking clarity on all potential costs—both immediate and long-term—organizations can make informed decisions that support both current goals and future scalability. This approach not only aids in budget planning but also ensures a smoother, less costly transition as digital needs evolve.
Right Sizing a CMS or DXP to Your Team Size
The size, structure, and skill level of your team are critical factors in selecting the right digital platform. A CMS or DXP should fit within the team’s capacity to manage and maintain it effectively. While some platforms are optimized for leaner teams with limited technical resources, others require more hands-on management, specialized skills, or dedicated resources. Assessing the match between team size and digital experience platform complexity can prevent bottlenecks and ensure sustainable, productive use of the platform.
Small Teams with Limited Technical Resources
For smaller teams—particularly those with few or no dedicated developers—a straightforward CMS like WordPress can often be a more practical choice. WordPress is known for its ease of use, extensive community support, and availability of user-friendly plugins, which allow smaller teams to manage and update the platform without requiring extensive technical expertise. This flexibility lets smaller teams focus on content creation, marketing, and customer engagement without getting bogged down in complex platform management.
Mid-Sized Teams with Some Technical Expertise
For mid-sized teams that may have a mix of content creators, marketers, and a few developers, a more customizable CMS or a lighter DXP can offer a balanced solution. Platforms like Umbraco, which have greater flexibility and integration options than basic CMSs, can serve organizations that want to go beyond the basics without requiring the extensive resources that larger DXPs demand. Mid-sized teams can often manage these platforms effectively, especially if they have some in-house technical knowledge or access to external development support as needed.
Large Teams with Dedicated Technical and Content Management Resources
Organizations with large teams—particularly those with dedicated IT, development, and content management resources—may benefit from the more robust capabilities of an enterprise-grade DXP. These platforms often provide advanced features, deeper integrations, and personalized user experiences that require dedicated attention from both technical and non-technical teams. For example, a DXP might involve developers, content strategists, marketers, and data analysts working in tandem to leverage the platform’s full potential. Large teams can also handle the complexities of regular updates, advanced customizations, and long-term scalability requirements that come with a DXP.
Considerations for Team Growth and Upskilling
Beyond current team size, consider your organization’s capacity for growth and upskilling. Selecting a platform that matches not only the current skill level but also the learning curve that your team can realistically manage is essential for a smooth adoption. Platforms with comprehensive training resources or community support, like WordPress, can facilitate easier skill development for teams. Meanwhile, more niche or specialized platforms may require additional training investments or even hiring specific expertise.
Flexibility to Scale Team Capacity
Choosing a platform that aligns with your team’s current size but allows for future scaling is critical, especially for growing organizations. As teams expand or projects become more complex, it may be necessary to add technical roles or invest in ongoing training. Ensuring that the platform can accommodate these adjustments without requiring an entire overhaul will support smoother transitions as the organization evolves.
Choosing a Technology Stack That Fits Your Organization
A platform’s technical compatibility with your organization’s existing tech stack is a vital consideration for a seamless and efficient digital experience. Selecting a CMS or DXP that aligns with your infrastructure can simplify integrations, enhance performance, and reduce the need for extensive custom development. Moreover, choosing a platform that matches your organization’s technical skills and resources ensures that your teams can effectively support, maintain, and optimize the platform over time.
Organizational Tech Stack
When evaluating CMS options, it’s essential to consider how each platform integrates with your current tech stack. For example, if your organization primarily operates within a .NET environment, selecting a CMS like Umbraco, which is built on .NET, can offer a natural fit. This alignment allows your teams to leverage existing .NET expertise, streamline integration with other .NET-based tools (such as Microsoft Dynamics or Azure services), and simplify overall platform management. Compatibility with your existing stack can minimize the need for additional technical support or retraining, keeping both initial setup and ongoing maintenance more efficient.
On the other hand, organizations heavily invested in open-source or PHP-based environments may find WordPress a better match. Its PHP foundation and widespread compatibility with popular marketing, eCommerce, and analytics tools allow for an easy fit with a range of open-source systems. In these cases, selecting a platform that naturally aligns with the organization’s technical foundations can significantly reduce friction, allowing for more seamless integrations and a quicker time to launch.
In addition to immediate compatibility, think about your organization’s future growth and scalability needs. Selecting a platform that aligns with your current infrastructure but also offers flexibility for expansion—such as integrating with new tools or scaling to support more traffic—will provide more value in the long term.
Agency Partnership and Support
An often-overlooked factor in CMS selection is the availability of external agency support. Many organizations rely on agencies to implement, optimize, and maintain their digital platforms, making it important to consider the expertise of available agency partners when choosing a technology.
Some agencies specialize deeply in specific platforms, such as Umbraco, Sitecore, or WordPress, and have dedicated teams that bring a high level of expertise and efficiency to these projects. Working with an agency that has extensive experience in your chosen platform can expedite the setup process, ensure best practices, and provide faster support when needed. Specialized agencies often have developers who know the nuances and best practices of a platform, which can reduce troubleshooting time and improve platform stability.
Alternatively, if your organization works with a more generalist agency or one that supports multiple platforms, consider whether they have the depth of expertise to support a complex CMS or DXP. Agencies with broad CMS experience can be valuable for organizations that may switch platforms in the future or use multiple CMSs across different projects. However, without platform-specific expertise, generalist agencies may require more time to onboard, configure, and troubleshoot more advanced implementations.
Choosing a platform that aligns with the expertise of your agency partners not only ensures smoother implementation but also supports a collaborative relationship that leverages your partners’ strengths. This alignment is especially important for organizations that depend on third-party support for long-term maintenance and upgrades, as it can help prevent service delays and reduce costs associated with knowledge gaps.
Choosing a Technology Stack that Fits Your Preferred Agency
Some businesses choose an agency partner before selecting a CMS or DXP. We believe this can yield great results assuming you’ve selected a great agency partner. If you go this route then your agency will guide your technology selection. Agencies vary widely in their approach; some specialize deeply in a few specific platforms, while others adopt a broader approach, offering support across multiple technologies. The alignment between your platform choice and your agency’s expertise can impact both the quality of implementation and the long-term stability of the platform.
Specialized vs. Generalist Agencies
Some agencies choose to specialize in a single CMS or DXP, investing in deep knowledge and experience with that particular platform. These specialized agencies often bring highly trained teams with nuanced expertise, allowing them to configure, customize, and troubleshoot the platform efficiently. For example, an agency focused exclusively on Umbraco or WordPress can leverage a mastery of that platform’s best practices, design principles, and technical intricacies. When working with a specialized agency, you can expect smoother implementation, faster problem-solving, and a generally more stable platform.
On the other hand, generalist agencies support a range of platforms, which can be useful if your organization uses multiple CMSs or might transition between platforms in the future. However, supporting a wide array of CMS and DXP platforms often limits the depth of knowledge that developers and support teams can acquire. Small or mid-sized agencies, in particular, may struggle to maintain expertise across more than a couple of platforms. A team of 10 to 15 people may be highly effective as experts in one or two systems, but asking them to manage five or six different CMS or DXP platforms can dilute their expertise and slow down development cycles. In our experience it is a major red flag if a small agency claims to support or be experts in technology across stacks (dot net, PHP, Java) and or too many DXPs (Sitecore, Acquia, Optimizely) and too many key integrations (Tessitura, Association Management Systems, ERPs, CRMs, etc.). These platforms are simply too large and too complex for a small team to develop sufficient experience and expertise in all of them.
Size of the Agency and Dedicated Expertise
Larger global agencies often have the resources to create dedicated teams for each CMS or DXP. These agencies may have entire departments for WordPress, Umbraco, Optimizely, Sitecore, and other platforms, each with specialized developers, designers, and support staff. In these cases, working with a large, specialized team can offer the same level of depth and expertise as a smaller, focused agency. However, it’s essential to confirm that the agency’s team working on your project is actually specialized in your chosen platform, as some larger agencies may still rotate developers across projects or rely on generalists for certain roles. The downside of course is the cost or effort of coordinating across teams and localities. Working with a smaller agency if often the more efficient and cost effective choice with less communication overhead.
Platform-Specific Knowledge and Workflow Efficiency
Understanding how an agency approaches platform-specific quirks and best practices is also important. For instance, WordPress has a vast ecosystem with established best practices, and agencies that are highly familiar with WordPress can navigate its plugin landscape, theme design standards, and performance optimizations effectively. By contrast, Umbraco, with its .NET foundation, may require less platform-specific training, allowing developers to focus more on custom development rather than specific configurations. Developers who are well-versed in the chosen CMS will know how to work within its strengths and limitations, optimizing performance and avoiding unnecessary conflicts or workarounds.
If your agency partners do not have experience with the specific CMS, they may “fight” the platform rather than adapting to its workflows and best practices. This can lead to longer implementation times, more frequent bugs, and overall inefficiency. Ensuring that your chosen agency has hands-on experience with the platform in question will reduce friction, allowing your team to benefit from a smoother workflow and a platform that functions as intended.
Choosing a CMS or DXP that aligns with your agency’s expertise is essential for a smooth, effective implementation. Specialized agencies or dedicated teams within larger agencies can offer deep knowledge, while generalist agencies may be better suited to companies that need support across multiple platforms. Confirming that your agency truly understands the platform’s best practices and workflows will help avoid the pitfalls of misaligned expectations and allow your organization to maximize the platform’s potential.
Getting Support and Finding Experts
A CMS or DXP’s scalability and the support available for its growth are crucial factors in platform selection. Scalability ensures that your digital platform can handle growing traffic, content, and functionality demands over time. Additionally, a platform’s developer and community support resources can significantly impact the ease with which your team can manage and expand the system. Platforms with extensive community support and a strong pool of qualified experts provide long-term advantages, reducing reliance on proprietary solutions and enhancing the flexibility to grow and adapt.
Developer and Community Support
The strength and accessibility of a platform’s developer community can impact both the cost and ease of scaling a CMS. WordPress, for example, is widely supported by a vast community of developers, designers, and support resources. This community provides extensive online tutorials, forums, plugins, and code libraries, making it easier for organizations to find solutions, troubleshoot issues, and implement customizations. WordPress’s support network is one of the largest among CMSs, providing ample resources for users at any skill level, from beginners to seasoned developers.
Umbraco, on the other hand, has a smaller but dedicated community primarily focused on .NET development. While it doesn’t offer the same breadth of online tutorials as WordPress, Umbraco has an engaged community that offers resources like certified training programs, forums, and targeted developer support. Additionally, Umbraco offers a streamlined, enterprise-level support experience, particularly through its paid support packages, which can be highly beneficial for companies that need consistent, reliable guidance on .NET-specific issues.
When selecting a CMS or DXP, it’s essential to consider whether your team can rely on self-service resources like tutorials or if you’ll need more hands-on support. For organizations with smaller or less technical teams, a platform with a large user community and easily accessible resources, like WordPress, may offer greater flexibility. Meanwhile, companies looking for .NET-based solutions may find that Umbraco’s targeted, high-quality support resources suit their needs despite its smaller community size.
Finding Qualified Experts
The availability of skilled developers is a key consideration for any platform, especially if your organization relies on external support or plans to scale with in-house resources. WordPress, with its dominance in the CMS market, has a broad pool of qualified developers globally. This makes it relatively easy to find developers, both locally and remotely, who are skilled in WordPress development. Additionally, the abundance of WordPress developers typically keeps hiring costs competitive, making it accessible to a wide range of organizations.
Umbraco, with its .NET foundation, tends to attract a more specialized group of developers. While this can be advantageous for organizations with an existing .NET environment, the pool of qualified Umbraco developers is smaller, which may increase hiring timelines and costs. This is particularly relevant for organizations operating in regions with fewer .NET developers or those with specific location requirements. However, for companies with complex, enterprise-level needs, the expertise of Umbraco developers can be highly valuable, as they often bring experience working with more structured, enterprise-grade implementations.
Choosing a scalable platform with strong community support and a reliable developer pool is critical for a sustainable digital experience. WordPress offers the advantage of a vast, accessible community and a broad developer network, making it well-suited for organizations that prioritize flexibility and ease of access to resources. In contrast, Umbraco provides more focused support within the .NET ecosystem, ideal for companies that need targeted expertise in a smaller, highly skilled community. By aligning platform choice with available support and scalability needs, organizations can ensure they have the resources required to grow and maintain their digital experience effectively.
Compliance & Security Requirements
For organizations, especially those operating at scale or across multiple regions, compliance and security are paramount. Choosing a CMS or DXP that can meet rigorous governance, security, and compliance standards is essential for protecting sensitive data, maintaining regulatory adherence, and ensuring the integrity of digital experiences. Different platforms offer varying degrees of built-in compliance and security features, and understanding these differences helps in making a platform choice that aligns with your organization’s risk tolerance and regulatory obligations.
Governance and Content Compliance
Effective governance is a critical feature for organizations managing large volumes of content across multiple regions or teams. Many DXPs, such as Sitecore, Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), and Optimizely, are designed with robust governance frameworks, enabling organizations to establish clear permissions, approval workflows, and audit trails. These features are particularly valuable for large enterprises that need to ensure content consistency, prevent unauthorized changes, and comply with industry standards or internal policies.
For example, DXPs often provide advanced user role management, allowing administrators to define granular access permissions across departments or regions. This level of governance helps prevent accidental changes, ensures content quality, and enforces compliance with brand and regulatory guidelines. In contrast, traditional CMSs like WordPress and Umbraco also offer governance tools, but their default capabilities are more limited. Organizations using these CMSs often need to rely on third-party plugins or custom development to achieve similar governance standards, which can introduce additional complexity and maintenance considerations.
Data Location and Residency
Data location is a significant factor for organizations that must comply with regional data residency laws, such as GDPR, which mandates that certain types of personal data remain within the European Union. DXPs often provide flexible options for data residency, including hosting data in specific regions or through cloud providers that comply with local regulations. Platforms like AEM and Sitecore often partner with globally distributed cloud providers, allowing organizations to specify data storage locations to meet regional compliance requirements.
Some DXPs also offer options for hybrid or on-premise hosting, which can be advantageous for organizations with highly sensitive data or those operating in regions with stringent data sovereignty requirements. This level of flexibility allows enterprises to maintain control over where data is stored and processed, ensuring compliance with local laws and reducing potential legal risks.
In contrast, traditional CMSs may have fewer built-in data location options. Organizations using CMSs like WordPress often rely on hosting providers to meet data residency requirements, selecting vendors that can guarantee regional data storage. While this approach can be effective, it may lack the integrated, enterprise-grade assurance provided by DXPs that offer first-party control over data residency.
First-Party Data Management and Privacy Compliance
As privacy regulations grow stricter, managing first-party data responsibly has become a priority for many organizations. DXPs are often designed to support complex data privacy requirements, offering tools to manage cookie consent, data access requests, and data anonymization. Features like consent management and compliance dashboards allow organizations to handle first-party data securely and in line with regulations such as GDPR, CCPA, and HIPAA, providing users with greater control over their personal information.
First-party data management also includes the ability to track, personalize, and analyze user interactions securely within the DXP environment. By securely managing first-party data, organizations can create personalized digital experiences while adhering to privacy regulations. DXP tools help ensure that user data is collected, stored, and processed transparently, often including native support for data retention policies and secure data access protocols.
For traditional CMSs, managing first-party data often requires additional plugins or integrations with third-party tools. WordPress and Umbraco, for example, support GDPR compliance and cookie consent management through various plugins, but this may introduce dependencies on external providers. Organizations relying on these CMSs need to carefully vet plugins to ensure compliance and secure handling of user data, particularly as privacy laws evolve.
Security Features and Vulnerability Management
The ability to protect against security threats is a foundational requirement for any digital platform, particularly for organizations that handle sensitive data or operate across jurisdictions with strict data protection laws, such as GDPR in the EU. DXPs are generally designed with enterprise-grade security features, including built-in support for secure data storage, encryption, and robust access control. Platforms like AEM, Sitecore, and Optimizely provide security frameworks that can be configured to meet stringent industry standards, along with proactive monitoring for vulnerabilities and compliance with certifications like ISO 27001.
In addition, DXPs frequently support single sign-on (SSO) and multi-factor authentication (MFA), essential for reducing the risk of unauthorized access. For organizations in highly regulated industries, such as finance or healthcare, DXPs may also offer enhanced data protection features, including encrypted communications, secure API integrations, and comprehensive logging for audit purposes.
Traditional CMSs like WordPress and Umbraco are also capable of supporting secure implementations but typically require more configuration, managed hosting or third-party plugins to achieve the same level of security. For instance, WordPress’s open-source ecosystem makes it highly customizable but also requires careful plugin selection and regular updates to protect against vulnerabilities. Many organizations using WordPress invest in additional security layers, such as managed hosting with integrated security features or specialized plugins that enhance data protection and access controls.
Regulatory Compliance and Data Privacy
As data privacy regulations evolve, ensuring compliance is increasingly complex, particularly for organizations with a global presence. DXPs are often equipped with built-in tools for managing compliance with laws like GDPR, CCPA, and HIPAA, enabling organizations to handle customer data responsibly and securely. For example, Sitecore and AEM offer tools for managing cookie consent, data anonymization, and data access requests, making it easier for organizations to comply with regulatory requirements without extensive custom development.
Traditional CMSs like WordPress and Umbraco can also support compliance efforts but may require additional plugins or customizations. Plugins for GDPR compliance, cookie consent, and data privacy are readily available for WordPress, allowing organizations to address these needs with minimal coding. However, relying on third-party plugins for compliance introduces a dependency on external developers and may require additional due diligence to ensure that updates and support remain available as regulations change.
Auditing and Reporting
For organizations that need extensive auditing and reporting, DXPs offer comprehensive tools for tracking user activity, content changes, and access history. These features are essential for demonstrating compliance in regulated industries and for providing clear oversight over digital activities. DXPs often include built-in dashboards and reporting functions that allow compliance teams to monitor activity in real-time, identify unauthorized changes, and maintain a full audit trail for accountability.
CMS platforms like WordPress and Umbraco may offer auditing capabilities through plugins or add-ons, but these options tend to be less integrated and may require additional setup. While smaller organizations may find basic auditing sufficient, large enterprises with complex compliance needs may benefit from the centralized reporting and enhanced accountability that DXPs provide.
Pros and Cons of Custom vs Configured, The Ease of Integrations
When implementing a digital platform, deciding between a custom-built solution and a pre-configured system is a foundational choice that impacts flexibility, speed, and the ease of integration. Both approaches have strengths and trade-offs, and the decision often comes down to the complexity of integrations required and the organization’s goals for data sharing and workflow automation.
Custom vs. Configured Solutions
A custom solution offers maximum flexibility, enabling organizations to tailor the platform precisely to their needs, including specific workflows, unique branding requirements, and complex integrations. Custom-built platforms allow full control over functionality and design but often require a higher level of technical resources and longer implementation timelines. This approach can be highly advantageous for organizations with unique needs that can’t be met by a standard CMS or DXP configuration.
However, the downside of custom solutions is the potential for increased complexity and long-term maintenance. With every custom feature or integration, there is an added layer of management and support that may require specialized skills to maintain. Over time, these requirements can lead to greater dependency on in-house developers or third-party vendors, which could become costly or slow down updates and changes.
Configured solutions, on the other hand, are pre-built to handle common needs and scenarios, often with a range of out-of-the-box features that make implementation faster and more cost-effective. DXPs like Sitecore, Optimizely, and Adobe Experience Manager are often configured with pre-built modules for common enterprise needs, such as analytics, personalization, and multi-channel content delivery. These platforms allow organizations to achieve a fully functional digital experience quickly, with minimal custom development, which can be beneficial for organizations looking for a streamlined approach.
The drawback of configured solutions is their potential limitations in flexibility. While many DXPs and CMSs support basic customization, heavily configured systems may not adapt well to unique or evolving needs, especially when it comes to complex integrations. For organizations with highly specific requirements or proprietary workflows, a custom solution may ultimately provide a better fit.
Integrations vs. Fully Integrated Systems
Integrations are a crucial factor in choosing between a custom and configured solution. It’s essential to understand the difference between platforms that integrate with other systems versus those that are fully integrated. In simple terms, integrations allow systems to share or exchange data, while fully integrated platforms create seamless, real-time connections across systems, making data and workflows available across the organization without added steps or delays.
A fully integrated system is often required when multiple complex data streams need to interact in real-time. For instance, digital experiences that pull from an association management system (AMS), connect to an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system, and communicate with a learning management system (LMS) require an advanced level of integration. DXPs are generally designed to handle this level of connectivity, supporting deep integrations with CRM, ERP, and marketing automation platforms. The benefit is a more holistic, unified digital experience that enables real-time data sharing and cross-functional workflows, critical for enterprises with complex data environments.
Basic integrations, such as single sign-on (SSO) and lead capture forms, are relatively straightforward and supported by both CMSs and DXPs. Sending lead capture data to MailChimp, for instance, is a simple integration that most platforms can handle with minimal setup. However, organizations should assess whether this level of integration is sufficient or if they need a more fully integrated system that enables advanced, synchronized interactions across multiple data sources.
For example, an eCommerce site that also serves as a content hub may only need basic integrations with a CRM or email marketing tool. In contrast, a complex organization requiring a DXP might need a fully integrated ecosystem where data flows seamlessly between systems such as marketing automation, customer support, AMS, ERP, and LMS systems. Fully integrated setups allow real-time customer insights, streamlined operations, and a more cohesive user experience.
Pros and Cons
Choosing between a custom or configured solution, as well as assessing the depth of integration required, ultimately depends on the complexity of your digital ecosystem and how your data needs to flow between systems. Custom solutions offer maximum flexibility and can be tailored to specific requirements but may incur higher costs and require significant ongoing maintenance. Configured solutions, while faster and often easier to implement, may come with limitations in customization and integration depth.
Organizations looking for straightforward integrations, such as SSO and lead capture, will likely find most CMSs and DXPs sufficient. However, those requiring a fully integrated system—particularly those relying on complex, multi-system data exchanges—may benefit from investing in a robust DXP that is built for enterprise-level connectivity. This choice ensures that as data flows through various systems, it remains unified and accessible, creating a seamless digital experience and maximizing operational efficiency.
No one gets fired for buying IBM.
When writing a guide like this one, we think it is important to point out that technology selection is not just about the tech and business requirements. In technology selection, decision-makers often gravitate toward what appears to be the “safest choice”—a solution with a strong reputation or industry prominence. You may have heard the anecdote: “No one ever got fired for choosing IBM,” can lead organizations to make conservative decisions based on brand reputation, perceived stability, or industry trends, rather than a clear alignment with organizational needs and objectives.
As a technology strategist we have had the unique opportunity to guide the DXP selection process for many organizations. Most CTOs will only implement a new DXP perhaps twice in a 20 year career. While on the agency side I’ve seen dozens of selections and implementations. In my experience the selection is always a combination of people and process. And people are just that, people. And people are surprising.
- I’ve even seen a large non-profit association buy DXP level ecommerce capabilities and never use them. Literally bought a license for 85K and held it for two years. Never built on it.
- Another business bought a DXP only to move to a new headless solution just months later abandoning hundreds of thousands of dollars of investment. Why? Because a new leader came in and favored a competing platform.
- Another organization had a new CEO come in and demanded a rebuild of an Umbraco implementation just months after launch because it was not flashy enough.
How People Buy vs. Why They Should Buy
The decision to select a digital platform should ideally be based on practical criteria: alignment with business goals, user needs, technical fit, and long-term sustainability. However, the reality is that many technology decisions are driven by subjective factors—brand perception, executive preferences, or even fear of making a “risky” choice. This disparity between how people buy versus why they should buy highlights a common pitfall in technology selection.
Instead of defaulting to a perceived “safe” choice, organizations should prioritize clear, objective criteria to guide platform selection. This means asking fundamental questions: Does the platform meet our specific functional needs? Can it scale with us? Will it integrate effectively with our existing tech stack? Will it provide a good return on investment? By focusing on these practical considerations rather than brand or executive bias, organizations can make choices that genuinely support their objectives and maximize the value of their investment.
The Risk of Choosing Overpowered Solutions
One common result of this approach is investing in powerful platforms that may be unnecessary for the organization’s actual needs. For example, a large nonprofit might purchase an enterprise-grade DXP with extensive eCommerce capabilities, even if the eCommerce features aren’t central to their digital strategy. These high-level platforms are often marketed as all-encompassing solutions, offering everything from personalized user journeys to deep CRM integrations, but they also require a significant financial commitment and complex implementation. If these features go unused, the organization may end up with a costly, underutilized system that doesn’t justify the investment.
This scenario isn’t uncommon. In one case, a client implemented a DXP with substantial upfront costs, only to migrate to a headless CMS just months later. The move was driven by a leadership change that brought in a new decision-maker with a different technology preference. The transition abandoned hundreds of thousands of dollars in investment, underscoring the importance of aligning platform choice with long-term organizational strategy rather than individual preferences.
The Value of Technical Supremacy
Performance is critical—especially when it directly impacts user experience, engagement, and conversions. Choosing a CMS or DXP with a high-performance architecture can deliver a competitive edge by improving speed, reliability, and scalability.
Why Speed Matters
Real speed matters for conversions. Even a slight delay in load times can cause higher bounce rates and lost sales. High-performing platforms enable faster content delivery, reducing friction in the user journey and fostering trust and engagement. For businesses where every millisecond counts—such as eCommerce or content-rich sites—performance optimization can be a key differentiator.
Architectures that Drive Speed
Selecting a CMS or DXP that supports modern architectural patterns like MACH (Microservices, API-first, Cloud-native, and Headless) or JAMstack (JavaScript, APIs, and Markup) can enhance platform performance and flexibility. These architectures allow for modular, scalable solutions, where components can be independently optimized for speed. Headless architecture, for instance, decouples content delivery from management, enabling faster load times across web, mobile, and other digital channels.
Aligning Performance with Platform Choice
When selecting a CMS or DXP, it’s essential to evaluate the platform’s support for performance-focused architectures. While many traditional CMSs can be adapted to modern frameworks, DXPs often come with built-in support for API-based and headless configurations, streamlining high-performance implementations. Ultimately, aligning your platform choice with your performance goals ensures that you deliver fast, engaging digital experiences that meet the expectations of today’s users.
Content Taxonomy and Information Architecture
A well-structured content taxonomy and robust information architecture are essential for creating an effective, scalable digital experience. When choosing a CMS or DXP, organizations must consider how each platform supports complex content types, flexible taxonomies, and structured data relationships. These elements impact not only how content is managed but also how it’s delivered to users across channels, influencing both usability and future scalability.
Content Types and Structured Data
Content types define the structure and organization of data within a CMS or DXP. For example, a content type could be an article, event, product, or testimonial, each with its unique fields and metadata. Platforms that support flexible and extensible content types, such as headless CMSs or DXPs, provide developers and content strategists with more control over content structure. This flexibility allows for the creation of complex, reusable content modules that can be dynamically rendered across different pages or digital channels.
For example, a DXP may allow developers to create custom content types that integrate with CRM data, providing a unified view of the customer journey and enabling personalized content. This capability is valuable for enterprises that need to scale their content strategy with precise control over how information is categorized, searched, and personalized. In contrast, some traditional CMSs may have limited support for custom content types, making them more suitable for simpler use cases but less adaptable to content-rich ecosystems.
Content Taxonomy and Metadata
Content taxonomy and metadata help organize information in a way that is both user-friendly and optimized for search and retrieval. A flexible taxonomy system is crucial for websites with vast content libraries, such as knowledge bases, eCommerce sites, or media platforms, where users rely on well-structured navigation and filtering options to find relevant information.
DXPs often provide advanced taxonomy management tools, allowing teams to create hierarchical categories, tags, and metadata fields that can be applied across content types. This capability enables content strategists to build a layered taxonomy that can adapt to various user journeys and support personalization efforts. For instance, a product page on an eCommerce DXP might include metadata for product category, color, brand, and related accessories, making it easy for users to filter and search effectively.
A CMS with limited taxonomy capabilities may restrict the depth and flexibility of content categorization, which can hinder scalability and limit personalization options. Organizations looking to implement complex information architectures should seek a platform that supports custom taxonomies and metadata schemas, allowing for precise control over how content is organized and retrieved.
Information Architecture for Multichannel Delivery
The way information is structured within a platform affects its ability to deliver content consistently across multiple channels, such as web, mobile, or IoT devices. DXPs are generally designed to support multichannel content delivery, often providing API-based access to content that can be rendered differently based on the channel. This flexibility is critical for organizations adopting a headless approach, where the back-end content management system is separated from the front-end delivery layer.
For a CMS that is not inherently built for multichannel delivery, creating a scalable information architecture can require additional workarounds or custom API development. Choosing a platform that natively supports multichannel, API-driven content delivery can simplify the process, allowing developers to create a unified content architecture that serves multiple user interfaces without duplicated content or inconsistent experiences.
Scalability and Maintenance of Content Taxonomies
As digital content grows, maintaining a coherent taxonomy and information architecture becomes increasingly challenging. Platforms that support dynamic taxonomies, content modeling, and hierarchical structures simplify the process of scaling content libraries and adjusting taxonomies over time. For instance, a DXP might allow administrators to adjust categories and tags without breaking existing content relationships, ensuring a seamless experience even as the content strategy evolves.
Content-heavy organizations should evaluate the ease of managing and scaling taxonomies within each platform. Platforms that offer built-in tools for taxonomy updates, version control, and content migration reduce the effort required to maintain an organized content structure, allowing content teams to focus on delivering value to users rather than troubleshooting technical limitations.
Ecommerce Capabilities
The technical needs of an enterprise-level eCommerce platform are vastly different from those of a small or mid-sized online store. While CMS-based solutions like WooCommerce or Umbraco’s uCommerce provide accessible eCommerce features, they lack the depth of functionality and scalability that enterprise environments demand. Enterprise DXP commerce platforms, such as Optimizely Configured Commerce, Adobe Commerce, and Sitecore Commerce, offer specialized capabilities that enable large-scale, complex digital commerce operations, making them the preferred choice for organizations with advanced requirements.
Advanced Product and Catalog Management
In an enterprise setting, product catalogs can include thousands of SKUs with intricate relationships, variant configurations, and dependencies. DXP commerce platforms provide robust catalog management features, supporting complex product hierarchies, attributes, and metadata. For instance, platforms like Adobe Commerce allow for multi-layered categorization, dynamic pricing rules, and advanced search functionalities powered by machine learning.
By contrast, CMS-based eCommerce solutions like WooCommerce are designed for simpler catalog structures and may struggle with the complexity of extensive product hierarchies or customization options. WooCommerce supports basic product options and variations but lacks the flexibility to manage large inventories with detailed specifications and configurable options, making it more suitable for smaller product catalogs. We love WooCommerce for small mom and pop shops, print on demand applications, and affiliate marketing. But we’ve found its limitations when it comes to setting up things like complex shipping rules.
Personalized Customer Experiences
Enterprise commerce platforms excel at delivering personalized shopping experiences, leveraging customer data to tailor content, recommendations, and promotions in real-time. Platforms like Optimizely Configured Commerce and Sitecore Commerce are built with advanced personalization engines that use data from customer profiles, purchase history, and behavioral insights to deliver targeted experiences. This includes personalized pricing, recommendations, and even dynamic content that adjusts based on user actions or segment criteria.
CMS-based platforms, while supporting some level of personalization through plugins, lack the real-time processing power and customer data integrations of a DXP. For example, WooCommerce can offer basic upsells and related products but lacks the granular control and machine learning algorithms available in enterprise DXPs. This limitation can hinder larger businesses that rely on real-time personalization to enhance the shopping experience and increase conversions.
Multi-Channel and Global Commerce Capabilities
For organizations operating internationally or across multiple channels, DXPs offer extensive support for multi-channel commerce. Platforms like Adobe Commerce and Optimizely support multi-store architectures, allowing businesses to manage distinct storefronts under a single platform, with localized content, currency, tax regulations, and language. Additionally, DXPs facilitate seamless integration across multiple sales channels (e.g., web, mobile, in-store), creating a consistent customer experience regardless of where the interaction takes place.
WooCommerce and uCommerce, while capable of supporting multi-language and multi-currency features, lack the depth required for fully integrated, multi-channel global commerce. These CMS-based solutions are not optimized for handling complex regional compliance requirements or providing centralized management of multi-site ecosystems. For businesses needing global reach and consistent user experiences across various regions, a DXP provides the scalability and configuration options to meet those demands.
High-Level Integration and Data Connectivity
Enterprise eCommerce platforms are designed to integrate seamlessly with other critical business systems, such as CRM, ERP, marketing automation, and customer data platforms (CDPs). For instance, Optimizely Configured Commerce and Sitecore Commerce provide APIs and connectors to unify data streams, enabling real-time inventory updates, customer insights, and order management. These integrations ensure that data flows smoothly across the organization, allowing for data-driven decision-making and operational efficiency.
In comparison, WooCommerce and uCommerce have limited integration capabilities and may require custom development or third-party plugins to connect with larger systems. While they support basic integrations for popular CRMs or email marketing tools, they lack the enterprise-grade integration frameworks and data-sharing flexibility found in DXPs. This limitation makes CMS-based solutions less suitable for complex environments where data connectivity is essential to operations. Again WooCommerce is great for some stores, and is extremely fast to market. We’ve setup WooCommerce sites in less a day.
Scalability and Performance Optimization
Enterprise eCommerce platforms are built to handle high volumes of traffic and transactions, even during peak periods. Platforms like Adobe Commerce offer built-in performance optimization tools, advanced caching, and cloud scalability options to support high-demand scenarios. DXPs are optimized for stability and speed at scale, reducing the risk of downtime during promotional events or holiday shopping surges.
CMS-based solutions like WooCommerce, while functional for small to medium businesses, are not designed for enterprise-level load handling. WooCommerce, for example, relies heavily on the underlying WordPress infrastructure, which may require extensive optimization and caching solutions to maintain performance under heavy loads. For high-traffic environments, an enterprise commerce platform ensures reliability and efficiency, reducing the risk of revenue loss due to performance issues.
Robust Security and Compliance
Security is a top priority in enterprise eCommerce, and DXPs typically offer a more comprehensive suite of security features compared to CMS-based solutions. Platforms like Sitecore Commerce and Adobe Commerce are equipped with enterprise-grade security protocols, PCI compliance, data encryption, and advanced access controls. These platforms also offer ongoing updates and compliance features to meet industry regulations, such as GDPR, CCPA, and other global data privacy standards.
CMS-based eCommerce platforms, while supporting security best practices, often rely on third-party plugins for features like PCI compliance or two-factor authentication. For smaller businesses, these tools may be sufficient, but for enterprises handling sensitive data across global markets, DXPs provide a more robust and unified security infrastructure that is essential for compliance and risk management.
Opensource vs Closed Source
The choice between open source and closed source platforms is often shaped by differing business models rather than purely technical or ideological factors. While open source platforms like Umbraco and WordPress provide free access to their source code, they are still driven by strong commercial interests. Both platforms rely on revenue from premium features, managed hosting, plugins, and support services, which fund their development and enable them to compete in the market. Open source does not necessarily mean purely altruistic intentions; rather, it reflects a business model where community contributions coexist with revenue-driven interests.
Closed source platforms like Optimizely and Sitecore operate on a different commercial model, backed by private investors and focused on driving growth and innovation in a competitive landscape. These platforms often pursue strategic acquisitions and partnerships to expand their capabilities and maintain a strong position in the digital experience market. Optimizely and Sitecore regularly introduce new features and technologies, responding to market demands and advancing their platforms’ value for enterprise clients.
Interestingly, open source platforms like WordPress and Umbraco also participate in acquisitions and marketplace competition. WordPress, for example, has acquired plugin developers and expanded its managed hosting options to enhance its ecosystem, while Umbraco has also made acquisitions and offers premium features through its ecosystem. Both open source and closed source platforms are evolving and driven by commercial considerations, competing in a marketplace where ongoing investment and innovation are essential. In our view the appeal and aura of open source is fading as it becomes clear that the commercial interests and investment behind these platforms are also driving at revenue.