EN
Umbraco and WordPress are both mature open-source CMSs. The difference is not in what they can do — you can build almost any website with either — but in how the ecosystem works and what that means for security, maintenance and cost over the years. We build with Umbraco, so read this comparison with that in mind. We do say honestly when WordPress is the better choice.
| Aspect | Umbraco | WordPress |
|---|---|---|
| Technology | .NET (Umbraco 17 runs on .NET 10) | PHP |
| Functionality | Closed core; extensions as custom code or a small package ecosystem | Core plus tens of thousands of third-party plugins |
| Releases and support | Fixed cadence; LTS versions with 3 years of support | Rolling updates, no LTS line |
| Multilingual | Built in: variants per language with their own workflow | Via translation plugins with their own licences |
| Content model | Structured and block-based, built in | Free-form, via page builders and plugins |
| API and automation | The backoffice itself runs on the Management API (since 14); API users with their own permissions (since 15) | REST API in core (since 4.7); application password inherits the user's full role |
| Ready-made themes | Hardly any — Umbraco sites are custom built | Thousands, ready to use |
| Cost at the start | Higher: custom design and build | Lower: a theme plus hosting can be enough |
| Maintenance after | Along the LTS line, predictable | Continuous plugin and core updates |
Security firm Patchstack counted 11,334 new vulnerabilities in the WordPress ecosystem over 2025, 42% more than the year before. 91% were in plugins, 9% in themes; WordPress core itself had six, all low priority. For 46% no patch was available at the moment of publication. (Source: Patchstack, State of WordPress Security in 2026.)
Two things are fair to add. WordPress is by far the largest platform in the world, so it also attracts the most researchers. And Umbraco has third-party packages too. The difference is architecture: functionality that is a third-party plugin in WordPress — forms, SEO, multilingual, security — is built in or custom code in Umbraco. Every plugin is effectively an extra vendor inside your website, with its own update rhythm and its own chance of being abandoned tomorrow.
At the start WordPress wins: a theme, a hosting plan and you are live. Over the years the picture shifts. WordPress costs sit in premium plugin licences and in ongoing maintenance: keeping updates current, guarding compatibility, monitoring security. Umbraco costs sit up front in the build investment, after which maintenance follows the predictable LTS line. What a switch or upgrade concretely costs is written out in what does an Umbraco migration cost?
The WordPress core itself is well maintained — Patchstack counted six vulnerabilities in it over 2025, against more than 11,000 in plugins and themes. The difference is the ecosystem: an Umbraco site simply carries fewer third-party vendors. But any CMS without maintenance is insecure; a neglected Umbraco site is no safer than a well-managed WordPress site.
At the start, almost always. Over several years it depends on what the site carries: premium plugin licences and continuous update management add up, while Umbraco maintenance follows the predictable LTS cadence. For a simple site WordPress stays cheaper; for a site with a lot of custom functionality and integrations the picture usually flips.
Yes. Content and media move over automatically; the content structure is redesigned — which is also the moment an overgrown site becomes a tidy site again. What such a project looks like is in our migration case study.
Yes, multilingual is built in: every page exists in variants per language with its own publication status and workflow, without translation plugins. We run our own site in two languages (Dutch and English), including automatic hreflang linking between them.
Umbraco is .NET and runs on Windows and Linux. We host Umbraco sites on Linux containers with blue-green deployments — updates with zero downtime, on European infrastructure.
Yes — WordPress has had a REST API in core since version 4.7 and built-in application passwords since 5.6. The difference is coverage and permissions. The Umbraco Management API is the API the backoffice itself runs on, so anything an editor can do, an integration can do too; in WordPress, custom fields, custom content types and page-builder content fall outside it by default. And an Umbraco API user gets its own role with fine-grained permissions, whereas a WordPress application password always inherits its user's full permissions. More on that in why Umbraco, and not WordPress.