Yes, I've used both Webflow and WordPress for marketing sites, and each has its strengths depending on the project's needs. I prefer Webflow for design flexibility and speed. Its no-code visual editor makes it easy to create custom, high-quality designs without relying on third-party plugins or heavy coding. However, Webflow has a steeper learning curve, and its CMS, while powerful, isn't as robust for handling large-scale blogs compared to WordPress. WordPress, on the other hand, is better for SEO and scalability. With thousands of plugins and themes, it allows for deeper customization, but plugin dependencies can slow down performance and require ongoing maintenance. One major annoyance is security vulnerabilities-without regular updates, WordPress sites can be prone to attacks. Webflow is ideal for design-heavy, visually engaging sites, while WordPress excels in SEO, blogging, and long-term scalability-choosing between them depends on the project's priorities.
We've used both Webflow and WordPress for marketing sites, and each has its place. Webflow is excellent when we need high-quality landing pages quickly, without relying heavily on developers. The visual editor makes design changes fast and easy, which is great for marketing teams running campaigns. However, when scalability and deep integrations matter, WordPress is still our preferred choice. It offers better flexibility with plugins, advanced SEO controls, and easier CRM and marketing automation integrations. The trade-off? Maintenance can be a headache plugin conflicts, security risks, and performance issues require ongoing management. One surprise with Webflow is its CMS limitations. For structured content, it's fine, but for complex dynamic content or deeper integrations, it can feel restrictive. Pricing can also add up, especially for teams managing multiple sites. Our approach? Webflow for fast-moving, design-heavy pages. WordPress for long-term content-driven sites that need full control. In some cases, we even use a hybrid approach Webflow for landing pages, and WordPress for the main site to balance speed and functionality.
I've used both Webflow and WordPress for marketing sites, and each has its strengths. Webflow is great for custom design without needing to dive deep into code, so if you're looking for a sleek, high-design site that's also super flexible, Webflow's the way to go. But it can be a bit tricky to wrap your head around if you're new to it. WordPress, on the other hand, is way more user-friendly for most people. It's a content machine and has tons of plugins to make life easier. The downside? It can get slow if you're running a ton of plugins, and if you're not careful, it can turn into a bit of a mess. Both platforms have their quirks, but it really depends on what you're looking for-Webflow's for custom design, WordPress is for functionality and ease.
From experience developing Webflow websites, I recommend Webflow over WordPress any day of the week for marketing sites. Webflow's intuitive visual design interface allows for greater creative freedom and real-time editing without needing extensive coding knowledge - this streamlines workflow significantly. Additionally, Webflow offers robust hosting with built-in performance optimizations, leading to faster loading times, essential for user experience and conversions. Plus, SEO features are user-friendly and give you better control over meta tags and URL structures. In contrast, WordPress often requires regular plugin updates, additional hosting and maintenance, which can lead to compatibility issues and downtime. Overall, Webflow simplifies the design process and minimizes frustrations. Give it a try and you will never turn back.
As a seasoned web engineer and Engineering Manager, I've had the privilege of working with both Webflow and WordPress on various marketing sites. In my experience, both platforms have their strengths and weaknesses. Webflow is ideal for creating visually stunning, custom-designed websites with a high degree of flexibility. Its drag-and-drop interface makes it easy to use, even for those without extensive coding knowledge. On the other hand, WordPress is a more traditional content management system that offers a vast array of plugins, themes, and customization options. It's particularly well-suited for blogging and content-heavy websites. That being said, I've encountered some issues with both platforms. With Webflow, I've found that its flexibility can sometimes be a curse, leading to over-design and complexity. Additionally, its CMS capabilities are limited compared to WordPress. On the other hand, WordPress can be overwhelming due to its sheer number of options and plugins, which can lead to compatibility issues and slower site performance. Despite these challenges, I've found that both platforms can be incredibly powerful tools in the right hands. My advice to marketers is to carefully consider their needs and goals before choosing a platform. If you need a highly customized, visually-driven website, Webflow might be the way to go. But if you're focused on content creation and blogging, WordPress is likely a better fit. Ultimately, it's essential to understand your target audience and tailor your platform choice accordingly.
I own a small web development business, and I work with marketing teams to help them grow their Webflow sites. Whilst I can't speak for what WordPress is currently like, as I haven't used it for many years, I can hopefully give a good account of how marketers find the experience of using Webflow. I think it entirely depends on who built your website and when it was built. So much of whether you have a good or bad experience with your Webflow project comes down to how it was set up and what features were available at the time. Features released by Webflow over the last year have made it much easier to give marketing teams control over their projects. As developers, we can now create drag-and-drop components that marketing teams can easily customise, giving them full control over building new landing pages and the ability to make quick changes across their whole website. Content editing has also been made much simpler in the last year. Marketers no longer have to use the clunky and outdated 'Editor' mode. They can now switch the main designer from design mode to build mode and work in a much nicer environment for making CMS and on-page changes. My advice would be, if you're struggling with an old Webflow project, find a Webflow developer who can modernise it and add the new features to make it easier to manage. And if you're planning a new Webflow project, make sure to use someone who will set everything up correctly, following best practices and a component-based approach that gives you granular control.
I've used both Webflow and WordPress for marketing sites, and honestly, the better choice depends entirely on the project's goals and long-term needs. Webflow is a dream for marketers who want pixel-perfect control without constantly relying on developers. The visual editor makes it easy to iterate and launch campaigns quickly. I once used Webflow to build a product launch landing page, and the real-time editing + fast deployment saved us a ton of time. However, the surprise came when we tried scaling it-Webflow's CMS has limits (like the number of dynamic items), and its pricing quickly adds up if you're running multiple sites or need advanced features. Also, if you ever plan to migrate away, Webflow's code export is not plug-and-play-it's messy, and you'll likely need to rebuild the site elsewhere. WordPress is unbeatable for larger, content-driven websites that need deep customization, advanced SEO control, and integrations with other tools. The biggest benefit? It can scale as much as you need-whether you're running a blog, a lead-gen site, or a complex eCommerce setup. That said, a huge pain point I've run into is plugin conflicts. If you're not careful, stacking too many plugins can lead to security risks, slow loading times, or worse-one update breaking half your site. To avoid this, keep plugins minimal, always test updates in staging, and invest in a solid hosting provider (cheap hosting will slow down WordPress fast).
At EDS, we've used both Webflow and WordPress depending on project needs. Webflow Preferred For: Design Flexibility: Ideal for visually-driven projects with custom designs and animations. SEO: Built-in SEO features, like clean code and meta tags, help boost rankings. Animation Tools: Powerful interaction tools make the site more engaging. Issues: Learning Curve: Webflow's interface can be complex for those not familiar with design tools. Content Management: Editing content can be cumbersome for non-designers. WordPress Preferred For: Content Management: Excellent for sites with dynamic content (blogs, testimonials). Plugin Ecosystem: Vast selection of plugins for adding specific features. Scalability: Works well for large-scale projects. Issues: Performance: Sites can slow down with too many plugins, affecting load times. Security: More frequent updates and security measures are needed to keep sites safe. Preference: Webflow is preferred for design-heavy, custom sites. WordPress is better for content-heavy, scalable websites. Both platforms have their strengths, depending on the project goals.
Having used both platforms extensively, I found Webflow offers superior design flexibility and cleaner code output compared to WordPress, though it comes with a steeper learning curve. When I built our agency's portfolio site on Webflow, I could create complex animations and custom interactions without plugins, which would have required multiple third-party tools in WordPress. However, WordPress remains stronger for content management and blogging features. The main annoyance with Webflow is its higher pricing and hosting limitations, while WordPress can become sluggish with too many plugins installed.
I've worked with both Webflow and WordPress for marketing sites, and each has its strengths depending on the project's needs. Webflow offers a visually intuitive, no-code experience, making it great for quickly launching beautifully designed landing pages without relying on developers. However, its learning curve can be steep, and complex functionality often requires custom code. On the other hand, WordPress provides unmatched flexibility, a vast plugin ecosystem, and better scalability for content-heavy sites, but it can be plugin-dependent, leading to potential security and performance issues. While Webflow excels in design freedom, WordPress remains my go-to for SEO-rich, content-driven websites. The biggest annoyance with Webflow is its lack of a robust CMS for large-scale blogging, while WordPress can be frustrating due to frequent plugin updates and maintenance requirements. Ultimately, the choice depends on the balance between design flexibility and long-term scalability.
Working at Rathly has given me a chance to handle our marketing site with WordPress, and the experience has been solid. WordPress offers a friendly interface with plenty of plugins and themes that simplify updates and design tweaks. The platform made it easy to adjust content on the fly, and I encountered very few glitches during routine edits. WordPress feels more down-to-earth compared to Webflow, which sometimes can be overwhelming with its custom design features. Managing content and layouts was less of a hassle with WordPress, and it let me focus on content without extra steps. A tip from my work is to keep things lean with plugins to avoid slow page loads and minor bugs that might crop up.
I've used both Webflow and WordPress for marketing sites, and honestly, it comes down to what you prioritize: speed and design freedom (Webflow) or scalability and flexibility (WordPress). Both have their quirks, but I've found that the best choice depends on your long-term goals rather than just ease of use. One thing that really surprised me about Webflow is how much it limits CMS scaling. It's great for smaller sites, but once you start adding dynamic content (like blogs, case studies, or complex category filtering), you hit restrictions fast. There's a hard cap on the number of CMS items in certain plans, and even simple things like conditional logic or filtering require workarounds. That said, the live preview, clean code, and reduced reliance on plugins make Webflow feel smoother for marketers who want control over the design without worrying about constant updates or security risks. With WordPress, the biggest frustration is plugin bloat-if you don't set up a lean stack from the start, your site can quickly become slow and vulnerable. But what I've learned is that you don't have to use a bulky page builder like Elementor to get a good experience-instead, using a mix of Gutenberg with ACF (Advanced Custom Fields) or custom blocks can actually make WordPress faster and easier to manage. Plus, WordPress wins in SEO because of its control over technical aspects like schema, structured data, and full access to backend optimizations, which Webflow limits.
I've used both platforms, and each has its advantages and disadvantages. Webflow makes it easy to design, but you might encounter limitations if you need specific functionalities. WordPress gives you more control, but managing plugins and updates can be quite troublesome. If you prefer simplicity, go with Webflow. If you need more power, WordPress is the better choice. The most significant issue is that WordPress updates can randomly cause problems. Webflow's pricing and the learning curve can also be frustrating. Neither option is perfect, but both can accomplish what you need.