We build with Framer ourselves and recommend it regularly — that up front, so this text is not read as a takedown. For brand and campaign sites that change often and carry little structured content, Framer is often the best choice in 2026. Why is in Framer vs. Webflow.
But there is a point at which a site outgrows Framer. This text describes how to recognise it, what a move to Nuxt actually involves, and how we carry it out without losing rankings.
The five signals
Not every one of them justifies a move on its own. Two or three together usually do.
1. The content has structure Framer does not model. A directory with relationships between entries. A blog with several authors, categories and languages that all need their own pages. Once workarounds — duplicate entries, tags standing in for references — shape daily work, the data model has become too small.
2. Multilingual gets serious. Two languages with a manageable page count work. Three or more with different offerings per market, separate URLs and clean hreflang become laborious and error-prone.
3. The site has to plug into systems. A login area with roles. A price calculation from ERP data. A configurator. Search across thousands of records. Anything beyond "form sends email".
4. SEO needs fine control. A coherent schema graph in which organisation, service, location and author reference each other cleanly. Hundreds of redirects from an old relaunch. Control over caching and delivery down to individual routes. Possible in Framer, but laborious — and for a site whose main channel is organic search it becomes permanent work.
5. The site is part of a product. When marketing site, customer area and application belong together, one system carrying all three is cheaper than three separate ones.
What Nuxt does differently
Nuxt is a framework built on Vue: it renders pages on the server so search engines and AI crawlers see complete HTML, then makes them interactive in the browser. Content comes from a headless CMS or from Markdown files in the project; design comes from components with defined rules.
The practical difference to Framer: there is no canvas. Layout changes are code changes. That is the price — and at the same time the reason anything a browser can do can be built with it.
For editorial teams less changes than it sounds: text, images and new entries are maintained in the CMS, not in code. What changes is who creates new page types.
What a move actually costs
Calculated honestly, there are three items:
The build. A marketing site with the usual page types, multilingual, with CMS connection, usually lands in the mid to upper four figures to build — more when product logic is added. Details in What does a website cost?.
The migration itself. Transferring content, redirects for every old URL, images at the right sizes, structured data rebuilt. This part is often underestimated and is where rankings are lost when it is done sloppily.
Operations afterwards. Hosting via Cloudflare is cheap to free. What costs money is further development — and someone who is not the original team should be able to do it.
Against that stands what the move saves: the workarounds, the third-party subscriptions for features Framer lacks, and the hours that went into things the old system was not built for.
How we migrate without losing visibility
The process is similar for every move, regardless of the source system:
- Full crawl of the old site. Every URL, every title, every description, every ranking from Search Console. That is the reference.
- URL concept before the build. Which addresses stay, which change, where each old URL points. Ideally as few change as possible.
- Build on a preview domain that is not indexed — with the same content, improved but not unrecognisable.
- Redirects as a list, each checked individually, no chains. One old URL, one hop, one new URL.
- Switch over on a quiet-traffic day, resubmit the sitemap, watch Search Console.
- Four weeks of observation. Rankings fluctuate briefly after a migration; whatever is still missing after four weeks has a concrete cause you can find.
Follow that process and you lose no visibility. Cut it short and you almost always do — not because of Nuxt, but because of the shortcut.
When you should stay with Framer
When none of the five signals applies. When the site above all has to change quickly and often, and today needs nobody who writes code for that. When the person maintaining the site is at home in Framer and that is the most important factor for pace.
A move made purely out of technical preference costs money and brings nothing. We say that even when we would have liked to build the Nuxt project.
If you are facing this question, write to us with where the current system sticks. How we work on it is on the Development page.
