The three approaches
| Approach | Strengths | Weaknesses |
|---|---|---|
| Hand-coded site | Fast, secure and fully custom | Every edit needs a developer |
| Traditional CMS | Staff edit everything, huge plugin choice | Themes and plugins can slow and complicate the site |
| Custom site with a CMS | Fast custom code plus easy editing | Needs an experienced team to set up |
Why speed differs
A hand-coded or custom-built site ships only the code each page needs. A traditional CMS with a multipurpose theme and many plugins often loads code for features the page never uses. That extra weight shows up in Core Web Vitals, especially on phones. A careful WordPress build can still be fast. It just takes more discipline.
Who should edit what
The real question is who changes the site and how often. If prices, services or team members change monthly, your staff need a CMS. If the site barely changes, a coded site with occasional developer help may cost less over time.
Good example. A law firm has a custom-coded site with a CMS behind it. Paralegals add case results and attorney bios themselves, while the developer handles new page types.
Bad example. A law firm's hand-coded site needs a developer ticket to fix a typo. The team stops updating it, and the content goes stale.
How we build
We build custom sites on frameworks like Astro and Next.js and connect a CMS such as Keystatic, Sanity, Strapi or Payload. Every section stays editable, and pages load like a hand-coded site. Rathly.com uses this setup and scores 100 on mobile Lighthouse tests. WordPress remains an option when a team needs it.
Read what a CMS is, or ask our web design team which setup fits how your team works.