Content management systems for marketing sites
Asked as “marketing website CMS”, and as “CMS for a marketing site”, on behalf of a mid-market B2B software company. 52 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, six models each.
Standing · first-choice share
42%
Clear leader
42HubSpot Content Hub29WordPress21Webflow08others
42% of first choices, clear leader.
Since September 2026↗new leaderNew leader since September 2026: HubSpot Content Hub (44%) replaces WordPress (33% then, 31% now), 13 points clear, past the 12-point floor.HubSpot Content Hub leads at 44%, replacing WordPress, which led at 33% and stands at 31% now: 13 points clear, past the floor. The verdict moved from contested to clear leader.
The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all six models, for a mid-market B2B software company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
01
HubSpot Content Hub42%8%61endorsed leader▲+22Since September 2026: 22% → 44%, +22 points. Past the 12-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.22% → 44%
HubSpot Content Hub42%8%61endorsed leader▲+22Since September 2026: 22% → 44%, +22 points. Past the 12-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.22% → 44%02
WordPress29%18%74accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 33% → 31%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.33% → 31%
WordPress29%18%74accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 33% → 31%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.33% → 31%03
Webflow21%7%55accepted challenger▼−5Since September 2026: 22% → 18%, −5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.22% → 18%
Webflow21%7%55accepted challenger▼−5Since September 2026: 22% → 18%, −5 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.22% → 18%04
Storyblok2%0%20accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%
Storyblok2%0%20accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%05
Squarespace2%39%18criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
Squarespace2%39%18criticized challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%Show the seven products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
12
Adobe Experience Manager0%70%10criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Adobe Experience Manager0%70%10criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%11
Drupal0%45%22criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Drupal0%45%22criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%08
Wix0%30%27criticized challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%
Wix0%30%27criticized challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%09
Shopify0%29%14criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Shopify0%29%14criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%10
Strapi0%27%11criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Strapi0%27%11criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%07
Sanity0%16%32accepted challenger▼−6Since September 2026: 6% → 0%, −6 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 0%
Sanity0%16%32accepted challenger▼−6Since September 2026: 6% → 0%, −6 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.6% → 0%06
Contentful0%14%44accepted challenger▼−10Since September 2026: 10% → 0%, −10 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 0%
Contentful0%14%44accepted challenger▼−10Since September 2026: 10% → 0%, −10 points. Inside the 12-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.10% → 0%The floor is 12 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
All ten head-to-head pages: the top five products, each against each
Recommended versus criticized
Every product with at least 10 labels here, on both axes. The 30% line names a quadrant, not the verdict above: that one needs more than 40%.
Criticized challengerCriticized default
Negative label rate →
010203040506070809101112Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative60%
Key
01HubSpot Content Hub42%
HubSpot Content Hub42%02WordPress29%
WordPress29%03Webflow21%
Webflow21%04Storyblok2%
Storyblok2%05Squarespace2%
Squarespace2%06Contentful0%
Contentful0%07Sanity0%
Sanity0%08Wix0%
Wix0%09Shopify0%
Shopify0%10Strapi0%
Strapi0%11Drupal0%
Drupal0%12Adobe Experience Manager0%
Adobe Experience Manager0%What they warned about
A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
WordPress18%
13 of 74 labels negative · 12 of 6 models
“WordPress can work well, but for marketing teams it often becomes risky when plugin sprawl, maintenance, security hardening, and content governance are not centrally managed.” GPT-5.4 mini, negative prompt
Drupal45%
10 of 22 labels negative · 10 of 6 models · 4 hard negative
“steep learning curve and higher operational overhead, making it a poor fit for most marketing teams without dedicated technical support” Mistral Small, negative prompt
Wix30%
8 of 27 labels negative · 8 of 6 models · 2 hard negative
“"Wix and Squarespace are genuinely good for simple sites but lock you in completely — migrating out costs $1,000–$5,000"...be cautious / avoid” Muse Glimmer 30B, negative prompt
Squarespace39%
7 of 18 labels negative · 7 of 6 models · 2 hard negative
“Avoid for Scaling: Rigid, Basic Site Builders *Examples: GoDaddy Website Builder, Squarespace, or Wix*” Gemini 3.5 Flash, negative prompt
What they cite
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list: fourteen of the six in this edition.
Sites the answers cite
75 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 6 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 896 links across 341 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. None of the 36 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category.
vendor site · LinkedIn24 answers · 26 citations · 10 models
vendor site · HubSpot22 answers · 41 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Guideflow22 answers · 29 citations · 11 models
20 answers · 26 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Elementor20 answers · 20 citations · 10 models
18 answers · 18 citations · 10 models
16 answers · 16 citations · 9 models
15 answers · 23 citations · 9 models
15 answers · 15 citations · 8 models
vendor site · Webflow13 answers · 14 citations · 6 models
13 answers · 13 citations · 8 models
vendor site · HubSpot11 answers · 13 citations · 8 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
20 answers · 10 models
17 answers · 10 models
16 answers · 10 models
16 answers · 9 models
15 answers · 8 models
15 answers · 9 models
13 answers · 7 models
12 answers · 8 models
12 answers · 8 models
12 answers · 8 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best marketing website cms”, “marketing website cms”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HubSpot parent site HubSpot Content Hub 42% | 42% | 278 | 368,000 | 9,776 | |||
| WordPress wordpress.com WordPress 29%, WordPress.com Personal 2% | 31% | 203 | 201,000 | 42,406 | 49,847,649 | $18 | 13 |
| Webflow webflow.com | 21% | 192 | 74,000 | 2,193 | 714,656 | $690 | 59 |
| Storyblok storyblok.com | 2% | 42 | 4,400 | 57 | 17,055 | 7 | |
| Prismic prismic.io | 2% | 22 | 22,200 | 48 | 76,784 | 2 | |
| Squarespace squarespace.com | 2% | 73 | 673,000 | 10,917 | 7,819,271 | $1,835 | 62 |
| Contentful contentful.com | 0% | 139 | 12,100 | 128,668 | 99,730 | 75 | |
| Sanity sanity.io | 0% | 75 | 27,100 | 3,142 | 49,180 | 115 | |
| Wix wix.com | 0% | 179 | 673,000 | 21,881 | 4,049,160 | $1,858 | 119 |
| Ghost ghost.org | 0% | 13 | 550,000 | 379,144 | 48,814 |
Google's top ten for the two searches hold 16 sites; 4 of them are among the sites the models cited here (blog.hubspot.com, hubspot.com, impactplus.com, sellingsignals.com). The first result for “best marketing website cms” is lilbigthings.com.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best marketing website CMS for a mid-market B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which CMS for a marketing site would you recommend to a mid-sized B2B company?”Comparative“What are the top content management systems for marketing websites and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best marketing website CMS for a company with a limited budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 500 person company evaluating a marketing website CMS. What should we look at?”Negative“Which content management systems for marketing websites should I avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Opus 5no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Claude Opus 4.8no first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-6 Astrano first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
GPT-5.6 Solno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Gemini 3.1 Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Perplexity Sonar Prono first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choiceno first choicenothing named
Bold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency. Full answer text is in the free responses file. Download the record
Zero rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|
Noise floor in this category
Flips between the edition run and its calibration repeat. Six prompts per model is a small sample; the index-wide floor is the number to trust.
ShowHide
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
Adobe AEM read as Adobe Experience Manager
HubSpot read as HubSpot Content Hub
Kentico read as Kentico Xperience
Magnolia read as Magnolia CMS
Sitecore read as Sitecore Experience Platform
Unresolved, counted raw
360PSG Fission CMS
ButterCMS
Forestry/Cosmic JS
HubSpot's CMS Hub
Joomla!
Managed WordPress via WP Engine or WordPress VIP
Pixpa
Umbraco Uno
Webflow CMS
WordPress.com Personal
Zesty.io
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.