Hygraph (previously GraphCMS) is a native GraphQL Headless Content Management System (CMS) and now evolved as a Federated Content Platform, enabling teams across the world to unify, structure, enrich and distribute content from anywhere to anywhere.
$299
per month per project
RWS Tridion Sites
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
RWS Tridion Sites provides web content management capabilities, connecting people, processes, and information across teams, brands, and markets, to deliver impactful online experiences globally. RWS Tridion Sites' DPX platform enables the use of either traditional or headless publishing. It includes advanced features such as automated personalization, multilingual capabilities and Semantic AI. The BluePrinting® technology at the core of RWS Tridion Sites simplifies reuse and…
N/A
Pricing
Hygraph
RWS Tridion Sites
Editions & Modules
Professional
$299
per month per project
Scale
$899
per month per project
Enterprise
Custom
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Hygraph
RWS Tridion Sites
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
35% discount for annual pricing.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Hygraph
RWS Tridion Sites
Considered Both Products
Hygraph
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Hygraph
We picked GraphCMS since it used Graph API and easily integrated it into our Gatsby website. It was also cheap (free) and easy to test out the product, making it easier to prove to our company we should pay for the product in the long run. Lastly, it seems to have a bunch of …
Interwoven teamsites, Documentum, Adobe - teamsites and documentum are old and limited. Adobe rocks but I like where I am and Tridion does a lot of the same things. No need to reinvent the wheel or move to a lateral product.
It is a nuclear missile compared to the other handguns and knives on the market today. But it also requires nuclear technicians and expertise that a handgun doesn't require. Do you need to decimate your competition and you have the investment capabilities necessary to put a …
Tridion is much better for multi-site installations, though Sitecore is a bit easier for content editors to know content types are being used based on visual icon indicators. We've had content editors pick the wrong templates by accident, but Sitecore's visual indicator …
Adobe CQ is SDL Tridion main competitor. Sitecore is designed for smaller companys. Adobe CQ is all java and thus has limitations. Sitecore is also all .net and has limitations. Both use a dynamic model and everything is compiled at runtime. SDL Tridion can be published in a …
Tridion again seemed to be more enterprise level then EpiServer, EpiServer allowed for faster ramp up time of a intuitive .NET framework, but Tridion seemed to have more tools and overall functionality once the CMS was customized towards the needs of the customer.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
I did not play a role in selecting this product so I can't say how it stacked up. I do know that Tridion is an improvement over the last CMS.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
I feel that SDL Tridion's User Interface is to difficult for content authors to understand. I worked with a client that used Tridion for years and she still would get lost in the UI and had to ask questions. There was close to 30% of continual time spent on the project simply …
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
SDL Tridion is far superior to CommonSpot. It is much more user friendly and increases efficiency.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
I believe the biggest selling factor for SDL was its customer service and it ability to be responsive. We knew that it was a company that was going to be around for a long time and would continue to provide the support that we would need in the long term.
Tridion's strength is really hosting multiple websites across development, test stage and production.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
The decision to purchase Tridion was made at a corporate level removed from the technical teams. Against our previous open source solution, this has been wildly expensive, impossible to find experienced developers for, and has required completely retooling our organization.
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
SDL has a better API and also handles high server load much better. Also, the built-in integrations for translations are more suited for performing lots of translations for many sites. However, Umbraco, like Tridion, has a great community and finding solutions with both …
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose RWS Tridion Sites
We didn't chose WordPress because can't handle the traffic we generate. Sitecore is what we are currently looking at and it looks like a much better alternative to Tridion.
Adobe does a great job in managing sites. Its user interface for authors is intuitive and leaps and bounds better than SDL Tridions new 2013 UI. The ease of install and management makes Adobe CQ a much better product. However, Adobe CQ (AEM) has limitations. It cannot scale as …
Features
Hygraph
RWS Tridion Sites
Hybrid CMS
Comparison of Hybrid CMS features of Product A and Product B
Hygraph
8.7
Ratings
0% above category average
RWS Tridion Sites
-
Ratings
Collaborative editing
8.00 Ratings
00 Ratings
Content templates
10.00 Ratings
00 Ratings
Approval and authoring workflows
8.00 Ratings
00 Ratings
Security
Comparison of Security features of Product A and Product B
Hygraph
-
Ratings
RWS Tridion Sites
9.0
Ratings
11% above category average
Role-based user permissions
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Platform & Infrastructure
Comparison of Platform & Infrastructure features of Product A and Product B
Hygraph
-
Ratings
RWS Tridion Sites
9.1
Ratings
18% above category average
API
00 Ratings
8.30 Ratings
Internationalization / multi-language
00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Web Content Creation
Comparison of Web Content Creation features of Product A and Product B
Hygraph
-
Ratings
RWS Tridion Sites
8.5
Ratings
10% above category average
WYSIWYG editor
00 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Code quality / cleanliness
00 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Admin section
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Page templates
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Library of website themes
00 Ratings
8.20 Ratings
Mobile optimization / responsive design
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Publishing workflow
00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Form generator
00 Ratings
8.30 Ratings
Web Content Management
Comparison of Web Content Management features of Product A and Product B
I would recommend GraphCMS to anyone who is also using Gatsby to build their website. If not, I would recommend them to consider GraphCMS but also consider other options. GraphCMS is a tool in which you are responsible to make the most out of it, but sometimes this requires more time and knowledge than a normal engineer may be able to handle. But with more time and attention, the reward of off-lifting content creation from the developers is a huge time saver in the long run.
SDL Tridion works well for organizations with a large website with a lot of content to continuously create and manage. The use of page templates and component presentations makes creating new pages fairly straightforward. It can be a little cumbersome when it comes to trying to "break from the norm" and build web pages that are outside of the template-driven format; however, there are ways around this to create pages that break away from the normal page-template format of the website. In this regard, SDL Tridion can be pretty flexible, allowing us to create a lot of custom functionality to keep up with constantly changing web trends.
GraphCMS is very expensive at the enterprise level.
GraphCMS requires deep knowledge of the system and requires lots of time to be efficient with it (especially around creating specific data patterns/relationships).
Multiple times a day, the system will give us errors when attempting to save something but the errors are unclear as to what went wrong (can be irritating).
If you are hoping to orbit the planet with a CMS, Tridion is built to leave the solar system. It is a very very powerful solution built for very serious enterprise businesses in hope of robust capabilities, which could be good or bad.
Supporting business users is a hefty lift and requires significant training and regular retraining, and support.
It's a niche solution that originally came out of Europe and was largely unknown in America. But today it's growing in popularity across the United States.
Finding capable support, and developers specializing in Tridion capabilities isn't always easy. And 8 years ago it was nearly impossible, involving finding European developer support shops in order to get the assistance needed. This is changing though and American developer firms are becoming more widely available.
I am giving this a semi-high rating because we have already got Tridion up and running and we are still in the process of moving the sites over to Tridion. It is unlikely we will be moving things to a new CMS AGAIN in the near future as the cost to get Tridion was high.
The editor user interface is very user friendly and in-site editing makes simple updates fast and easy. The extensibility of Tridion is a big plus and the ability to add our own options into the default Tridion interface helps us integrate with external systems. Finally, the user permissions and security system helps us deploy it within our large organization.
We picked GraphCMS since it used Graph API and easily integrated it into our Gatsby website. It was also cheap (free) and easy to test out the product, making it easier to prove to our company we should pay for the product in the long run. Lastly, it seems to have a bunch of support from other developers which makes us confident will be around for a while (and we won't need to replace it anytime soon). Note: I also looked at Directus and DatoCMS but these were not options within TrustRadius
Interwoven teamsites, Documentum, Adobe - teamsites and documentum are old and limited. Adobe rocks but I like where I am and Tridion does a lot of the same things. No need to reinvent the wheel or move to a lateral product.