Concrete CMS vs Microweber

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?
FeatureConcrete CMSMicroweber
CategoryContent Management SystemsContent Management Systems
LicenseMITMIT
LanguagePHPHTML
Setup difficultyEasyMedium
Min. RAM512 MB512 MB
Deploymentdocker, bare-metaldocker, bare-metal, source
GitHub stars★ 850★ 3,430
First released20082013
ReplacesWix, SquarespaceWordPress, Wix

Why pick each one

Choose Concrete CMS if…

  • Very approachable for non-technical editors
  • No separate admin needed for content
Concrete CMS details

Choose Microweber if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (3.4k GitHub stars)
  • Written in HTML
Microweber details

Frequently asked questions

Is Concrete CMS or Microweber better?

Neither is universally better. Microweber 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 Microweber free and open-source?

Yes. Concrete CMS is licensed under MIT and Microweber under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Concrete CMS and Microweber with Docker?

Concrete CMS: yes. Microweber: yes.

Related comparisons