Concrete CMS vs Keystone
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted content management systems options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Concrete CMS
In-context editing CMS for marketers and site owners
VS
Keystone
Headless CMS framework with a powerful GraphQL API
| Feature | Concrete CMS | Keystone |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Language | PHP | TypeScript |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker, bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 850 | ★ 9,938 |
| First released | 2008 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Wix, Squarespace | Contentful, Strapi |
Why pick each one
Choose Concrete CMS if…
- Very approachable for non-technical editors
- No separate admin needed for content
Frequently asked questions
Is Concrete CMS or Keystone better?
Neither is universally better. Keystone has the larger community, while Concrete CMS is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Concrete CMS and Keystone free and open-source?
Yes. Concrete CMS is licensed under MIT and Keystone under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Concrete CMS and Keystone with Docker?
Concrete CMS: yes. Keystone: yes.