Kirby vs Payload CMS
| Tagline | File-based CMS with no database required | Developer-first headless CMS and application framework built with TypeScript |
| Category | Blogging & CMS | Blogging & CMS |
| Replaces | Squarespace, WordPress.com, Contentful | Contentful, WordPress.com |
| GitHub stars | 1.5k | 43k |
| Language | PHP | Nodejs |
| License | ⊘ Proprietary | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Manual | Docker Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | yesterday | 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.
Kirby
- Commercial per-site license required; cost adds up for agencies managing many sites
- File-based storage does not scale well for high-traffic sites with many content editors writing simultaneously
- No built-in e-commerce, memberships, or newsletter functionality
- Plugin ecosystem is smaller than WordPress; fewer pre-built integrations available
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
Choose Kirby if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Payload CMS for the larger community and ecosystem. Payload CMS has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Payload CMS
Developer-first headless CMS and application framework built with TypeScript