Contentstack headquartered in San Francisco offers an API-first headless CMS. From desktops to smart phones, from kiosks to smart watches, from billboards to jumbotrons, from dashboards to VR headsets – content is delivered with the push of a button and optimized for every screen, device and channel.
N/A
Hygraph
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Hygraph (previously GraphCMS) is a native GraphQL Headless Content Management System (CMS) and now evolved as a Federated Content Platform, enabling teams across the world to unify, structure, enrich and distribute content from anywhere to anywhere.
Contentstack has better international hosting support then Contentful and we found the presales and sales support people were MUCH more responsive than Contentful. The Sitecore sales process was very very slow and overly complex. We felt Sitecore had many features that …
When we wanted to move to headless we took a look and tested some of the offerings available for headless CMS. Many do have similar features and services and so for us it came down to how Contentstack built a business relationship and service around their clients. We were given …
Featurewise, there's not a lot that separates these CMSs, and it's hard to assess in a SW selection phase exactly how the products stack up against each other. Ultimately, the choice of Contentstack came down to the dialogue with the sales rep.
Before deciding on Contentstack, we researched some tools, we chose it because of the ease of creating and changing content, the API options for querying content, the ease of modeling new content APIs, high capacity of the CDN to deliver content, ease of integration with other …
We picked GraphCMS since it used Graph API and easily integrated it into our Gatsby website. It was also cheap (free) and easy to test out the product, making it easier to prove to our company we should pay for the product in the long run. Lastly, it seems to have a bunch of …
Contentstack has flexible functionality which opens up a lot of possibilities for businesses with proactive web development teams to create their own website builder app to compete with 3rd party agencies. This is especially useful in a large enterprise where non-technical teams often turn to expensive outside agencies which cost more in the long run than an up-front investment into an in-house application.
I would recommend GraphCMS to anyone who is also using Gatsby to build their website. If not, I would recommend them to consider GraphCMS but also consider other options. GraphCMS is a tool in which you are responsible to make the most out of it, but sometimes this requires more time and knowledge than a normal engineer may be able to handle. But with more time and attention, the reward of off-lifting content creation from the developers is a huge time saver in the long run.
The user interface is intuitive and cleanly designed.
The functionality is flexible which allows us to build our own application behind the CMS that meets business needs without being restricted by limitations in the CMS.
The service we get from our Account Manager and Technical contacts is excellent.
In my opinion it's not very intuitive. I've found its difficult to understand how to best structure entries, especially if they are related
In my experience, entries can get difficult to understand if weren't the creator. It would be helpful to have some meta data around the entry itself and the fields within them in my opinion.
Integration with an A/B testing platform would be nice.
GraphCMS is very expensive at the enterprise level.
GraphCMS requires deep knowledge of the system and requires lots of time to be efficient with it (especially around creating specific data patterns/relationships).
Multiple times a day, the system will give us errors when attempting to save something but the errors are unclear as to what went wrong (can be irritating).
They have an in-app chat with their support team, who is always quick to respond and provide helpful answers. I've never walked away from an interaction without my issue being solved quickly and easily. They're also very communicative over email and are sure to follow up after any changes are made to ensure we're seeing the desired result. They are always very professional and easy to work with.
Contentstack has better international hosting support then Contentful and we found the presales and sales support people were MUCH more responsive than Contentful. The Sitecore sales process was very very slow and overly complex. We felt Sitecore had many features that were not valuable and the cost to benefit ratio was much lower compared to ContentStack
We picked GraphCMS since it used Graph API and easily integrated it into our Gatsby website. It was also cheap (free) and easy to test out the product, making it easier to prove to our company we should pay for the product in the long run. Lastly, it seems to have a bunch of support from other developers which makes us confident will be around for a while (and we won't need to replace it anytime soon). Note: I also looked at Directus and DatoCMS but these were not options within TrustRadius
We are able to prepare for large campaigns within a few days which can bel rolled our within a few clicks. This was previously never possible before we moved to Contentstack.
We now have the tools and ability to architect in a way to take advantage of SEO and drive traffic. Our blog now serves more traffic that the rest of our website. This SEO effort wasn't possible before Contentstack.
One of our KPI's for moving to headless was a faster website and we now deliver pages under our original target while serving more asset and content rich pages to visitors