The Short Version
Why we reach for it.
A regular CMS assumes content lives on one website. Sanity treats content as structured data that can be pulled into a website, an app, or anywhere else it's needed, which matters once a client's content needs to do more than sit on one page.
BEst fit when you're...
Content that needs to power multiple channels, not just one site
Custom-coded frontends built on Astro, Next.js, or similar
Teams wanting real structure and validation on their content, not a free-for-all
Projects needing a genuinely collaborative editorial workflow
Structured content modelling
Content served via API into whatever frontend actually needs it.
Headless delivery
Content served via API into whatever frontend actually needs it.
Customisable Studio
The editing interface shaped around how the team works, not a generic admin panel.
Editorial workflows
Editorial workflows
Real-time collaboration
Multiple editors in the same document at once, without overwriting each other.
Portable, structured data
Content stored as clean data you can query, reuse or migrate without a rebuild.
Similar Tools We Know
Other options to consider
Our Reviews
How is this different from Contentful?
Both are strong headless CMSs. The choice usually comes down to the project's editing workflow and developer preferences rather than one being definitively better.
Do our editors need to understand the structure to use it?
No, we hide the complexity in the Studio, so editors see clean, sensible fields whilst the structure does its work underneath.
Is Sanity overkill if we only have one website?
It can be. If content genuinely only ever lives on one site, a simpler CMS may do. We reach for Sanity when content needs to travel or scale.
Can Sanity feed an existing site rather than a fresh build?
Yes, as long as the front end can call an API, we can point it at Sanity and migrate the content across without starting over.
