Keystone vs WBCE CMS
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?
Keystone
Headless CMS framework with a powerful GraphQL API
VS
WBCE CMS
Community-driven PHP CMS forked from WebsiteBaker
| Feature | Keystone | WBCE CMS |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Content Management Systems | Content Management Systems |
| License | MIT | GPL-2.0 |
| Language | TypeScript | PHP |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal, source | bare-metal, source |
| GitHub stars | ★ 9,938 | ★ 45 |
| First released | 2013 | 2015 |
| Replaces | Contentful, Strapi | WordPress |
Why pick each one
Choose WBCE CMS if…
- Released under the GPL-2.0 license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- Written in PHP
- Tiny footprint — runs in 128 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Keystone or WBCE CMS better?
Neither is universally better. Keystone has the larger community, while WBCE CMS is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Keystone and WBCE CMS free and open-source?
Yes. Keystone is licensed under MIT and WBCE CMS under GPL-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Keystone and WBCE CMS with Docker?
Keystone: yes. WBCE CMS: check the project docs for container support.