Best Headless CMS: Should You Choose SaaS or Open Source?

That’s where headless CMS came into play.

But we can skip the hype; you probably already know why headless CMS and composable architecture are worth considering, which is why you’re here. If not, here’s a brief overview: by decoupling the front-end and back-end, composable web solutions allow for greater flexibility and scalability. This separation enables the use of various APIs for each layer which allows faster development and easier integration. Unlike traditional monolithic systems, where components are tightly integrated, composable architectures let you select the best tools for your stack.

If you’re still stuck with a traditional CMS or frustrated with your current stack, you’re likely thinking about what’s next and how to avoid buyer’s remorse.

One of the first big choices is deciding between open source or SaaS-based headless CMS solutions. In this post, we’ll walk you through both options—their strengths, weaknesses, and how to make the best decision for managing your content and optimizing your workflow. A good CMS solution will help you effectively deliver content and ensure a smoother process for your team.

By the way, if all this feels overwhelming, we’ve got the experience to help you figure it out—just contact us here.

How to Choose The Right Headless CMS: The Key Factors

Ease of Setup

Open Source: Requires more time, technical knowledge, and setup management (e.g., hosting).

SaaS: Quick to set up; provider handles hosting and infrastructure. This reduces the operational load.

Speed of Execution

Open Source: Setup and configuration take time, which may slow down deployment.

SaaS: Ready-to-go infrastructure, meaning a quicker time to market.

The Overhead of Maintenance

Open Source: Your team is responsible for updates, security patches, and overall maintenance, which can be time-consuming. However, the supportive developer community can provide solutions when challenges arise, which can save time and effort.

SaaS: Maintenance is managed by the provider, your team can focus fully on content and business goals.

Customization

Open Source: Full control over features and integrations, which allows deep customization. You can modify features and functionality without restrictions from external vendors. This flexibility enables you to adapt your CMS to meet current and future needs.

SaaS: Limited customization, as the core features are managed by the provider. For example, in Contentful, you may face API rate limits, and upgrading to higher pricing tiers—or in some cases even enterprise suits—might not always resolve the issue. Another common limitation is feature availability. For instance, when using Storyblok with Astro, the Live Preview feature required a plugin release from Storyblok itself. This means custom solutions depended on the provider's timeline.

Scalability

Open Source: More complex and expensive to scale; requires technical skills to expand infrastructure.

SaaS: Easily scalable with tiered or pay-as-you-go pricing models.

Stability

Open Source: You need to build your own team or have a third party company that is responsible for hosting so you can arrange an SLA (service-level agreement). SLA gives you peace of mind in terms of uptime for example.

SaaS: Typically includes formal support with SLAs, especially at higher pricing tiers. You can rely on the provider for troubleshooting and performance guarantees. For instance, Storyblok offers an uptime SLA of 95% for the entry tier, 97% for the business tier, and 99.99% for the enterprise tier. Most other options in the market only offer 99.99% for the enterprise plan.

Cost

Open Source: Open source doesn't mean “free”. Initial costs are low, but additional expenses like hosting, security, scaling and support can add up. Additionally, in some cases, only the core part of the CMS is open source, but you may need to pay for additional features. For example, WordPress offers a free core, but many themes and plugins are paid. Similarly, Strapi has a free version but offers paid enterprise features for advanced needs. However, many open source solutions offer free community editions and can be more cost-effective than proprietary options like Contentful or Storyblok.

SaaS: May have free tiers for basic features. Budget is more predictable, though higher tiers for premium features can become costly as your business grows.

Security

Open Source: Security is managed by your team. You have full access to the source code so your team can review it and conduct an internal audit and patch vulnerabilities before they become issues.

SaaS: Providers usually offer regular security updates as part of the service. For businesses with fewer technical resources, this can provide peace of mind. However this doesn’t fully guarantee security.

Updates and New Features

Open Source: Updates depend on the community or your own team’s initiative. New features are not guaranteed unless you build them yourself, but you have the ability to implement updates at your own pace.

SaaS: Commercial competition between headless CMS providers creates a race to release new features. For instance, Storyblok added the Live Preview feature, which was later introduced in Contentful. Currently, even though Hygraph is new, it’s working on Live Preview because it has become a must-have feature.

This factor depends more on the funding behind the project rather than whether it's open source or closed source.

Ecosystem and Community

Open Source: Often benefits from a large, active community of developers. You can find third-party plugins and integrations, but you may have to piece them together yourself.

SaaS: Offers a curated ecosystem of add-ons and integrations, but you are limited to what the vendor provides.

Vendor Lock-In

Open Source: No vendor lock-in since you own the code and can move it to any environment. This provides flexibility but requires more technical know-how.

SaaS: You’re tied to the provider’s platform and terms. Migration away from the vendor can be difficult and costly, especially if the data structure is unique to that provider. There’s also a budget risk, as prices can go up unexpectedly, leaving little time to react. The longer you stay, the more complex and costly migration becomes.

Support

Open Source: You’re responsible for support, either in-house or via external consultants. However, a robust community often provides help and resources.

SaaS: The provider usually offers different levels of support based on the pricing tier you choose.

Top SaaS and Open Source Headless CMS In 2024

According to G2, here are some of the top-rated headless CMS platforms in 2024, based on user reviews and satisfaction scores. If you click on any of them, you can see our review and their features, and even compare them together.

SaaS Headless CMS

• Sanity
• Storyblok
• Contentful
• DatoCMS
• Hygraph

Open Source Headless CMS

• Strapi
• Ghost
• Directus
• Decap
• Payload

Making the Right Choice: SaaS or Open-Source?

When deciding between Open source and SaaS solutions, focus on your project’s needs.

Go with SaaS if:

• You need a quick setup.
• You prefer less maintenance.
• Predictable costs are important.
• Your team has limited technical expertise.

Choose Open source if:

• You prioritize deep customization and control.
• Your team has the technical resources to manage it.
• You want to own the infrastructure (e.g., running your own servers).
• You’re prepared for hidden costs like hosting and security.

Consider your team’s capabilities, long-term scalability needs, and how much support you expect to manage internally.

Conclusion

Choosing between SaaS and open source headless CMS is an essential decision for your business. At Bejamas, we’ve been deeply involved in headless CMS implementations (read our case studies on our knowledge hub) since the early days of Jamstack. With our experience, we can help you navigate this complex landscape and find the best solution for your needs and enhancing your digital experience. Don’t hesitate to get in touch with us for a consultation—we’re here to help you succeed.