Kirby vs Strapi
| Tagline | File-based CMS with no database required | Leading open-source headless CMS with flexible API and content type builder |
| Category | Blogging & CMS | Blogging & CMS |
| Replaces | Squarespace, WordPress.com, Contentful | Contentful, WordPress.com |
| GitHub stars | 1.5k | 72k |
| Language | PHP | Nodejs |
| License | ⊘ Proprietary | MIT |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 3/5 Moderate |
| Deploy options | Manual | Docker Docker Compose 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
Strapi
- No built-in front-end rendering; requires a separate frontend framework
- Media asset transformation (image resizing, CDN) requires third-party providers
- Workflow and editorial approval features are less mature than Contentful
- Self-hosted upgrades between major versions can require manual migration steps
Bottom line
Choose Kirby if you want the lower-effort setup; choose Strapi for the larger community and ecosystem. Strapi has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Strapi
Leading open-source headless CMS with flexible API and content type builder