Sanity vs Contentful is one of the most common comparisons we are asked to make. Both are hosted headless CMS platforms, both are mature and well funded, and both power large, busy websites. On a feature checklist they look very similar.
In practice they feel quite different to build on and to use every day. This article explains where they differ, what that means for your developers and editors, and when we would pick one over the other.
The core difference
Sanity treats the CMS as something you build. The editing interface, called Sanity Studio, is an open-source React application that you configure in code and deploy. Content is stored in Sanity’s hosted Content Lake and queried with GROQ, Sanity’s own query language, or GraphQL.
Contentful treats the CMS as a product you configure. You define content types in its web app, editors work in a standard interface, and developers fetch content through its REST and GraphQL APIs. You can extend the interface with apps, but the shape of it is set by Contentful.
Put simply, Sanity gives you more control and asks more of your developers. Contentful gives you more out of the box and asks you to work within its structure.
Content modelling
Both platforms handle structured content well. You can create content types with references between them, reusable components, rich text and localised fields. If you are new to this, our content modelling guide explains the principles.
Sanity
In Sanity, the schema is code that lives in your repository. That means it is versioned with the rest of the project, reviewed in pull requests and easy to change. Fields can be nested deeply, and you can write custom validation and custom input components. Rich text is stored as Portable Text, a structured format that is easy to render in any front end.
Contentful
In Contentful, content types are usually built in the web app, though teams can also script changes with migrations. The model is a little flatter, with references used to link entries together. Plans set limits on the number of content types, records and locales, so very large or complex models need checking against your plan.
For complex, deeply structured content, Sanity tends to be easier to model. For organisations where non-developers manage the model, Contentful’s interface can be more comfortable.
Editor experience
Contentful’s editor is consistent and predictable. Editors fill in fields, link entries and publish. It is easy to train people on, and every Contentful project feels broadly the same, which helps larger organisations with many teams. Contentful has also added visual page-building tools, though how much you get depends on your plan.
Sanity’s Studio can be shaped to fit your team: custom dashboards, grouped fields, live previews and side-by-side visual editing through its Presentation tool. Real-time collaboration is excellent, with several people able to edit the same document at once. The catch is that all of this needs a developer to set up. A bare Sanity Studio is perfectly usable but quite plain.
A Sanity project is only as friendly as the time spent configuring the Studio. Budget for that work if your editors are not technical.
Developer experience and APIs
Developers often prefer Sanity. GROQ lets you fetch exactly the shape of data a page needs in one query, including joins across references. The schema in code fits normal development workflows, and the real-time APIs make live previews straightforward.
Contentful’s APIs are reliable and well documented, with separate delivery, preview and management APIs and a fast CDN. GraphQL support is strong. Environments let you test model changes in a copy of your space before applying them, which is useful for teams with formal release processes.
Both work well with Next.js, Nuxt, Astro and other modern front ends.
Pricing structure
We do not quote prices here because both vendors change them, but the structures differ.
- Sanity has a free plan, a paid Growth plan priced mainly per seat, and Enterprise. Usage such as API requests, bandwidth and documents is included up to a limit, with charges beyond it. Some features, such as Content Releases, are add-ons or Enterprise-only.
- Contentful has a free plan, a Lite plan and Premium for larger organisations. The free plan has tight limits, and the jump to paid plans is significant. Contentful is generally at the higher end of the market.
For a small or mid-sized team, Sanity usually works out cheaper. For large organisations, the totals depend heavily on negotiated terms. Always check current pricing against your expected seats, locales and traffic.
Sanity vs Contentful side by side
| Factor | Sanity | Contentful |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Hosted Content Lake, Studio you deploy | Fully hosted |
| Schema | Defined in code | Defined in web app or by migrations |
| Querying | GROQ and GraphQL | REST and GraphQL |
| Editor interface | Highly customisable, needs setup | Consistent and ready to use |
| Real-time collaboration | Strong | More limited |
| Governance and permissions | Good, advanced options on higher tiers | A long-standing strength |
| Cost profile | Free plan, then mostly per seat | Free plan, then a large step up |
| Best for | Developer-led teams with complex content | Large organisations with many teams |
Governance, scale and support
Contentful has spent years serving large enterprises, and it shows in roles, permissions, workflows, audit features and support agreements. If your CMS will be shared by many brands, regions or departments, that maturity counts.
Sanity also serves large companies and offers single sign-on, custom roles and enterprise support on its higher plans. Its scaling story is good, but a lot of the governance you get depends on how the Studio is built.
Localisation and multi-site setups
Both platforms handle multilingual content. Contentful has locales built into every field, with fallback rules, and the number of locales depends on your plan. It is a well-tested setup for organisations publishing in many markets.
Sanity lets you choose how translation works: field-level translations inside one document, or separate documents per language linked together. That flexibility is useful, but your developers have to pick an approach and build it into the Studio. Plugins cover the common patterns.
For several brands or sites sharing content, Contentful uses spaces and environments, while Sanity uses projects and datasets. Both work, but think about how content will be shared before you set anything up.
Lock-in and moving away later
Because both are hosted, your content lives on the vendor’s platform. Both let you export everything as JSON, so you are not trapped. The bigger cost of leaving is in the front end, where queries and components are written for one API.
Sanity’s Studio code and schema stay in your repository, which makes the model easy to document and rebuild elsewhere. Contentful’s model can be exported too. Either way, a clean, well-named content model is the best protection against lock-in.
Which should you choose?
In the Sanity vs Contentful decision, the team usually matters more than the features:
- Choose Sanity if you have developers who will own the CMS, your content is complex or deeply structured, you want a tailored editing experience, or you are watching costs as you grow.
- Choose Contentful if you are a large organisation with many teams, you value a standard interface over a custom one, governance and enterprise support are priorities, and the budget suits.
If marketers mainly need to build landing pages visually, look at Storyblok as well. We compare the wider field in our guide to the best headless CMS, and explain the basics in headless CMS explained.
Frequently asked questions
Is Sanity better than Contentful?
Not across the board. Sanity is more flexible and usually better value for developer-led teams. Contentful is stronger on out-of-the-box governance for large organisations.
Is Sanity or Contentful better for SEO?
Neither has an SEO advantage on its own. Rankings depend on the front end you build and on including fields for titles, descriptions, canonical URLs and redirects in the content model.
Is Sanity easier to use than Contentful?
For editors, a well-configured Sanity Studio can be easier. An unconfigured one is plainer than Contentful. For developers, most find Sanity quicker to work with.
Can we migrate from Contentful to Sanity?
Yes. Content can be exported from Contentful and imported into Sanity with scripts, and rich text can be converted to Portable Text. The front-end queries also need rewriting, so plan it as a proper project.
Next steps
We build on both platforms and can help you choose based on your content and your team. Book a free consultation and we will give you a clear recommendation and a fixed quote.
