Joomla! vs Payload CMS
| Tagline | Battle-tested open-source CMS powering millions of websites | Developer-first headless CMS and application framework built with TypeScript |
| Category | Blogging & CMS | Blogging & CMS |
| Replaces | WordPress.com, Squarespace, Contentful | Contentful, WordPress.com |
| GitHub stars | 5.1k | 43k |
| Language | PHP | Nodejs |
| License | GPL-2.0 | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | today | today |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Joomla!
- Admin UI is complex and dated compared to modern CMSes; steep learning curve for new users
- Extension quality is inconsistent; vetting third-party plugins for security requires effort
- Headless/API capabilities were added late and are less polished than dedicated headless CMSes
- Page builder and WYSIWYG experience falls behind Squarespace or WordPress.com in ease of use
Payload CMS
- Entirely code-first; non-technical editors cannot modify content schema without developer help
- No built-in CDN or image optimization; requires external services
- Plugin and integration marketplace is smaller than Contentful or Strapi
- Real-time collaborative editing is not natively supported
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose Payload CMS for the larger community and ecosystem. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Payload CMS
Developer-first headless CMS and application framework built with TypeScript