Framer vs Astro for a marketing site

Framer is the better choice for a marketing site when designers build and update it themselves and nobody wants to manage code or hosting. Astro is the better choice when developers own the site, you want the code in your own repository, and you need full control over performance, integrations and where it runs. Many teams start in Framer for speed and move to code once the site needs things a visual builder makes awkward; a converter can turn the published Framer site into an Astro project so the move doesn't start from zero.

Deframer, which this post mentions as one way to move, is an independent tool and is not affiliated with, endorsed or sponsored by Framer or Astro.

What each one is

Framer is a visual website builder with hosting included. You design on a canvas, add breakpoints, animations and CMS collections, and publish to Framer's servers. You pay for a site plan; the code that renders your site is Framer's, and it has no code export.

Astro is an open-source web framework. You write pages in .astro files and components in the UI library you choose, such as React. It prerenders pages to HTML by default and ships JavaScript only where a component needs it. You host the output yourself, on a static host or a Node.js server.

They solve the same problem, a fast public website, from opposite ends.

Side by side

Prices change often, so compare the structure, not this month's numbers. Framer hosting vs self-hosting costs has a worksheet.

Where Framer is stronger

• Speed from idea to live page. A designer can ship a landing page the same afternoon without a developer.
• Animation and interaction design. Scroll effects, hover states and page transitions are visual settings, not code.
• Non-technical editing. Marketers change copy and CMS items and publish without a pull request.
• No operations. Hosting, SSL, CDN and uptime are Framer's job.

If your marketing site is maintained by designers and changes weekly, those strengths are hard to beat.

Where Astro is stronger

• Ownership. The site is files in your repository. You can move hosts, fork it, audit it and keep it forever.
• Performance control. Astro prerenders pages and lets you decide exactly which scripts load. Every third-party tag is a decision you can see in code.
• Content at scale. Thousands of pages from Markdown, a database or a headless CMS are routine, without builder-specific limits.
• Integration with the product. Shared components, design tokens and authentication with your app are possible because it is all code.
• Developer workflow. Branches, preview deployments, code review and automated tests apply to the site like any other code.

How do SEO and performance compare?

Framer handles SEO basics well: titles, descriptions, social images, sitemaps and clean URLs. Is Framer good for SEO? lists where it stops. Astro gives you everything Framer does plus full control: structured data in any shape, custom headers, server redirects of any complexity and exact control over scripts.

For speed, Astro's defaults are excellent for content pages that need little JavaScript. A heavily animated design is a different case: animations need JavaScript in any stack, so an animation-heavy page will load React and an animation library whether it lives in Framer or in Astro.

Moving from Framer to Astro

If you have a Framer site and decide Astro fits better, you have two routes.

Rebuild by hand. Recreate each page as Astro components. You get exactly the structure you want, but matching breakpoints, animations and CMS content takes time, and the details are where rebuilds slip.

Convert, then refine. Deframer converts a published Framer site into an Astro 7 project in TypeScript: every page prerendered to HTML and hydrated as one React island, with the same animations, CMS content (as JSON) and forms. It's free to convert; downloading uses 1 credit with site verification, and it is for sites you own or have permission to convert. The step-by-step is in how to convert a Framer site to Astro.

The converted page is one React island, not many small ones, because a Framer page's layout and effects depend on each other. From there you can add new pages the Astro way, in .astro and Markdown, and replace converted sections with hand-written Astro components where it's worth it.

Can you use both?

Yes, and it's common during a transition. Keep designing new pages in Framer, convert again when they're ready, and merge them into the repository. Maintaining a converted site with Git explains how to merge a new conversion without losing your edits. Or put the Framer site and your app on one domain while you decide: see running a Framer site and an app on one domain.

Which should you choose?

Choose Framer if designers own the site, it changes often, and nobody on the team wants to run a build pipeline.

Choose Astro if developers own the site, you want it in your repository, it needs deep integrations or very large content, or you want to stop paying per site for a builder.

If you're torn between Astro and Next.js for the code side, read Next.js vs Astro for a converted Framer site.