Why I don't use Webflow or Wix for pro websites

The no-code trap

On paper, it sounds perfect: Webflow or Wix let you build a site without coding, by dragging and dropping blocks. The client can even edit their content themselves after delivery. Why bother with Next.js?

I asked myself that question. And I tested both approaches across several client projects. Verdict: for a freelancer's showcase site or a personal blog, no-code is enough. For a pro site - one that has to sell, convert, rank on Google, and evolve over time - it's rarely the right call.

Here's why.

1. Performance hits a ceiling right where SEO begins

A Webflow or Wix site loads 1.5 to 3 MB of platform CSS/JS before even showing your content. Mobile Lighthouse scores rarely break 70/100. By comparison, a well-built Next.js site runs at 95-100/100.

Why this matters: Google has used Core Web Vitals as a ranking signal since 2021. A slow site ranks lower, all else equal. And a slow site converts less: every extra second of load time means 7-10% lost sales on an e-commerce site.

On the projects I migrated to Next.js, I saw Lighthouse scores go from 65 → 98, LCP from 3.5s → 0.9s, and organic SEO traffic climb 30-50% within 3 months. No magic: just a fast site that ranks and converts.

2. Platform lock-in

When you build on Webflow, your site lives at Webflow. You pay 20-50€/month per site, indefinitely. You can't easily export it (the static HTML export loses all CMS features), and you can't move it to another host.

If Webflow changes its pricing, its terms, or if the company gets acquired and shifts strategy: you have zero leverage. Same for Wix, Squarespace, Shopify.

With a custom site, your code is yours. You can deploy it to Vercel for $20/month or your own VPS for $5/month. You can swap stacks in 6 months if you want. You're dependent on no one.

3. Creative limits hit fast

On a standard site (header, hero, sections, footer), everything's fine. But the moment the client wants something specific - a scroll animation, a custom interactive component, an integration with their business tool - you slam into the platform's walls.

On Webflow, you end up injecting custom JavaScript through "embeds", working around the visual editor, and ending up with badly organized code no dev will want to inherit. On Wix, it's worse: Velo (their scripting language) is a poorly documented proprietary language.

With Next.js, you do whatever you want. Framer Motion animations, custom API integrations, real-time dashboards: it's just React.

4. Technical SEO is throttled

On Webflow, you don't have fine-grained control over:

• Sitemap generation (you can influence it but not structure it the way you want)
• hreflang tags for multilingual sites (limited)
• Schema.org schemas (have to hack via embeds)
• 301 redirects (you get a limited number depending on your plan)
• HTTP headers (cache, security)

For a site that just needs to exist, fine. For a site that has to rank on competitive queries, you need every one of those levers.

My portfolio nash-web.com uses, for example:

• Dynamic multilingual sitemap with 180 URLs
• hreflang across 5 languages (FR/EN/ES/IT/DE)
• BlogPosting and Person schemas on articles
• Custom cache headers per content type

All of that is trivial to set up in code. On Webflow, you'd spend hours hacking around.

5. Total cost is higher over 2-3 years

The no-code pitch is "cheaper". Let's run the actual 3-year math for a pro site:

At first glance, Webflow wins by 1500-2500€. But that math ignores:

• The SEO traffic you gain with a fast site (can easily offset dev cost)
• The lock-in: if Webflow bumps to 80€/month in 2 years, you pay 1000€ more
• Resale: a custom site can be picked up by another dev. A Webflow site, much less so
• Evolution: adding a business module on Webflow costs 3-5x more than in code

Over 5 years, custom almost always becomes cheaper.

When no-code is fine

I'm not saying Webflow or Wix are bad in themselves. For these cases, they're perfect:

• Ultra-simple showcase site (5-10 pages, no evolution planned)
• Throwaway landing page (marketing campaign, event, MVP)
• Personal site / non-pro portfolio (where SEO ROI doesn't really matter)

But the moment you're talking about a pro site that has to generate business, custom code pays off long-term - performance, autonomy, scalability.

What I recommend

For a new pro site, my default stack is:

• Next.js 16 (App Router) for performance and native SEO
• Tailwind CSS for fast styling
• Sanity or Strapi as a CMS if the client needs to edit content
• Vercel or a VPS for hosting

The client gets a fast site, ranks on Google, can edit content via a CMS, and isn't dependent on any proprietary platform. Initial dev cost is higher than a Webflow, but ROI over 2-3 years is solidly positive.

If you're hesitating between the two, look at it concretely: how many SEO visitors are you expecting, how many custom features do you plan, on what timeline do you want to evolve. The answer becomes obvious.