What a headless CMS changes
A headless CMS stores and manages content and delivers it through an API. Your website or app is built separately and fetches that content. The same content can then feed a website, a mobile app and any other channel, and your developers choose the front-end technology.
The price is that you build and maintain the front end, previews take work, and editors cannot drag a page layout around the way they can in a page builder. Be sure that trade suits your team before you compare products.
The three side by side
| Area | Strapi | Sanity | Contentful |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Open source: host it on your own infrastructure or use the vendor's hosted cloud | Content lives on Sanity's hosted service; the Studio can be hosted by you or by Sanity | Hosted service only |
| Content modelling | Content types built in the admin interface and stored as files in the project | Schemas written in code, in JavaScript or TypeScript | Content types defined in the web app or through its API |
| Editor experience | A standard admin panel with a fixed look unless you extend it | A Studio you can shape heavily, with real-time collaboration | A consistent, fixed interface that you extend with apps |
| Localisation | An internationalisation plugin that adds locales to entries | Plugins and patterns for field-level or document-level translation | Locales built in at field level, with fallback locales |
| Roles and approvals | Roles and permissions; some governance features depend on the edition | Roles; access features depend on the plan | Roles and permissions; workflow and approval features depend on the plan |
| APIs | REST, with GraphQL as a plugin | The GROQ query language and GraphQL | REST and GraphQL |
| Extending it | Server-side Node.js code: custom endpoints, plugins, lifecycle hooks | A Studio customised with React, plus webhooks | An apps framework and webhooks |
| Who runs it | Your team or a hosting provider | Sanity runs the backend; your team configures the Studio | The vendor runs everything |
This table describes general character, not a ranking. Plans, editions and features change, so confirm the details for the plan you would actually use.
Hosting: who runs it matters more than it looks
Strapi is open source and can run on infrastructure you control, which gives you control of data location and cost. It also makes your team responsible for updates, backups, scaling and security. A hosted option from the vendor removes part of that work.
Sanity and Contentful keep content on the vendor's service. That removes server work, but your content lives with a third party, so check where it is stored, which regions are offered and whether that fits any data protection duties you have. Rules differ by country and sector. This is awareness, not legal advice: confirm with qualified counsel.
Whichever you choose, plan the exit. Know how to export all content and media, and test it once.
Content modelling and the editor experience
A content model is the set of types and fields that describe your content: an article, an author, a product, a page section. Good models follow how editors work and how the front end renders, not the first draft of a design.
Sanity defines its schemas in code, so models live in version control and are reviewed like any change, at the cost of needing a developer for each one. Contentful and Strapi let administrators build content types in a web interface, which is quicker to start but needs discipline across environments so that staging and production models do not drift apart.
For editing, Sanity's Studio can be shaped heavily to your workflow, Contentful offers a consistent interface that you extend with apps, and Strapi gives you a standard admin panel. The only fair test is to ask your real editors to build a real page of content in each shortlisted tool.
Localisation, roles and approvals
All three can hold English and Arabic. They differ in how. Contentful has locales built in at field level, with fallback locales. Strapi has an internationalisation plugin that adds locales to entries. Sanity supports both field-level and document-level translation through plugins and patterns. Our page on multilingual CMS setups explains the models and their trade-offs.
Test right-to-left in the editor itself, not only on the website. Type a long Arabic paragraph that includes a number and an English product name into a rich text field and see what the editor does with it.
Roles and approvals decide who can publish. List the roles you need, such as writer, translator, reviewer and publisher, and check which tier or edition of each product provides them. Governance features such as review workflows and audit history often depend on the plan.
APIs and extensibility
Contentful and Strapi offer REST and GraphQL, with GraphQL as a plugin in Strapi. Sanity offers its own query language, GROQ, and GraphQL. REST is easy to cache and debug. GraphQL lets a page ask for exactly the fields it needs. GROQ is expressive but specific to Sanity, so it ties your queries to that product.
For custom behaviour, Strapi lets you write server-side Node.js code, such as custom endpoints and lifecycle hooks. Sanity lets you customise the Studio with React. Contentful extends through its apps framework and webhooks. Whatever you pick, use webhooks to rebuild or refresh the front end when content changes, and check API rate limits against your expected traffic.
How to choose for your team
- Strong developers and a need to own the stack or the data location: start with Strapi.
- An unusual content model, or editors who need a tailored workspace: look at Sanity.
- Several teams, strict governance and little appetite for running servers: look at Contentful.
- A small team with a handful of content types: a headless CMS may be more than you need.
Then run a short proof before you decide. Model one real content type, add Arabic, set up a preview, create two roles and export everything. That teaches you more than any comparison, including this one.
When two tools both fit, choose the one your team will still be able to maintain in two years. Our guide to build versus buy uses the same test.
When WordPress or another traditional CMS is the better answer
A traditional CMS joins content, templates and delivery in one system. WordPress is the best known, and it is often the better choice in these cases.
- The site is mostly pages and posts, and editors want to build layouts themselves.
- You want a large ecosystem of themes and plugins rather than custom development.
- Your team already knows it, and a maintainer is in place.
- You do not need to feed content to apps or other channels.
The cost is upkeep: core, theme and plugin updates, hosting security and backups fall to you. WordPress has supported right-to-left languages in core for years, and established multilingual plugins such as WPML and Polylang exist. It can also act as a headless backend through its API. Our CMS service covers both traditional and headless builds, and the article on CMS for multilingual teams goes deeper on the bilingual decision.