Portfolio Platform Comparison
Framer, Webflow, Figma Sites, and Squarespace solve different problems. Choose based on the work you need to show, how often you publish, and how much site maintenance you actually want.
⚡ TL;DR
- Best default: Framer for most visual and interaction-led portfolios
- Best for a larger CMS: Webflow for a growing case-study library
- Emerging option: Figma Sites if you already work in Figma and accept an open-beta product
The Short Answer
If I were starting a design portfolio today, I would look at Framer first. It is a good fit for designers who want control over layout and interaction without turning the portfolio into a development project.
I would choose Webflow instead when the portfolio needs a larger CMS, more repeatable case-study templates, or a content structure that will keep growing. I would choose Cargo or Readymag for a more art-directed graphic, editorial, or image-led portfolio.
Figma Sites now belongs in that first group too. It publishes a real responsive website, not a prototype link, and now includes the portfolio basics I would expect: a CMS, custom domains, search settings, analytics, accessibility properties, interactions, and code layers. I would treat it as a strong emerging option rather than the safest default because it is still in open beta.
Squarespace is still capable, but I would not recommend it by default for a designer who wants the site itself to carry a distinct visual or interaction point of view. It makes more sense when getting a conventional site online quickly and maintaining it easily are the main priorities.
Pricing and plan names checked August 18, 2026
Platform pricing changes often. The figures below are US prices shown with annual billing where the vendor specifies it. Follow the official plan links before purchasing.
Changing platforms will not fix a weak first impression.
Paste your portfolio URL first. We'll show whether the problem is platform, structure, copy, or the work itself.
Portfolio Platform Comparison
Swipe left to compare tradeoffs and current plan details.
| Platform | Use it when | Watch for | Current plan note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Framer | Visual control, motion, and a design-led workflow matter | Easy to over-animate; plan limits increase with site complexity | Basic $10/mo; Pro $30/mo, billed yearly |
| Webflow | You need repeatable case studies and a substantial CMS | Steeper learning curve and more system setup | Basic $15/mo; CMS is now in Premium at $25/mo, billed yearly |
| Figma Sites | You already design in Figma and want to publish without a separate builder | Still in open beta; publishing and domain limits may change | Create on any plan; publishing requires a paid plan |
| Squarespace | Speed, reliability, and low maintenance matter most | Less freedom for a distinctive interaction or design system | Current plans are Basic, Core, Plus, and Advanced |
| Cargo | Your work benefits from an art-directed, less conventional site | Its editor and design language are intentionally opinionated | $14/mo yearly or $19/mo monthly |
| Readymag | You want editorial storytelling and controlled responsive layouts | Not ideal for a large, frequently updated content library | Free plan; paid plans vary by projects, views, and collaborators |
| Custom code | Coding is part of your practice and you want full control | Build time, accessibility, performance, and maintenance are yours | Hosting may be free at small scale; domain and time are not |
Framer
Framer is my current default for a designer who wants to get a distinctive portfolio online without making the site itself a long engineering project. Its model feels familiar if you already work in visual design tools, and motion is part of the normal building workflow rather than a separate layer.
Good fit
- Visual, interaction, and product designers
- Two to six case studies with a straightforward CMS
- Designers who want motion without a custom codebase
- A fast build that still leaves room for a point of view
Be careful
- Motion can distract from the case study very quickly
- The $10 Basic plan includes two CMS collections
- Larger sites may need the $30 Pro plan
- A visual canvas still needs responsive and accessibility checks
Current pricing: Free for a Framer domain, $10 per month for Basic, and $30 per month for Pro when billed yearly. Check the official Framer pricing page for limits. If this is your choice, use the Framer portfolio tutorial to plan the build.
Webflow
Webflow is the stronger choice when the portfolio is becoming a real content system. If you want one case-study template, structured project fields, site search, redirects, and room for a larger archive, its CMS is the reason to accept the steeper learning curve.
Good fit
- A growing library of projects, writing, or resources
- Designers comfortable thinking in layout and CSS concepts
- Structured case-study templates and repeatable fields
- Sites that need redirects and more involved publishing controls
Be careful
- The Basic plan no longer includes the CMS most portfolios need
- Class and component systems need discipline
- It can be too much machinery for three static projects
- Learning the tool can delay the writing and editing that matter more
Current pricing: Webflow changed its plans in May 2026. Basic is $15 per month billed yearly for sites without a CMS. The new Premium plan is $25 per month billed yearly and replaces the former CMS and Business plans. See current Webflow pricing and the May 2026 plan update. Our Webflow portfolio setup guide covers the build itself.
Figma Sites
Figma Sites changes the old answer to “Can I make my portfolio in Figma?” You can now design, build, and publish a real website inside Figma. It supports responsive breakpoints, a CMS for case studies, page titles and descriptions, control over search indexing, Google Analytics, accessibility properties, interactions, code layers, password protection, and custom domains on paid plans.
Good fit
- Designers who already keep their portfolio system in Figma
- A visual portfolio that needs responsive layouts and interaction
- Case-study collections managed through the built-in CMS
- Someone who wants to move between Figma Design and a live site
Be careful
- Figma Sites is still in open beta
- Publishing requires a paid plan; Starter can only build
- Domain, bandwidth, and beta terms can still change
- Responsive work still depends on sound auto layout and breakpoint decisions
Current availability: Anyone can create a Sites file, but public publishing currently requires a paid Figma plan. Education includes one published site, subject to bandwidth limits. Read the Figma Sites overview, CMS guide, and publishing guide before choosing a plan.
Figma Make can also publish a web app, but that is a different product with less direct SEO control. For a portfolio website, start with Sites. Use Make when the interactive thing you are building is itself part of the work.
Squarespace
Squarespace is still useful, but the recommendation needs to be narrower than it used to be. Choose it when the goal is a polished, conventional site that is quick to operate. I would not choose it first when the portfolio itself needs to demonstrate a distinctive interaction model, unusual editorial structure, or a highly specific design system.
Good fit
- A portfolio that needs to be online quickly
- Low-maintenance pages, galleries, a blog, and basic business tools
- Someone who does not want to manage a design system or hosting
- A clear presentation where the work, not the site, is the focus
Be careful
- Customization has a lower ceiling than Framer or Webflow
- Custom code requires the Core plan or higher
- Rebuilding elsewhere later still means rebuilding layouts
- The old Personal and Business plan advice is now outdated
Current plans: Squarespace now uses Basic, Core, Plus, and Advanced. Basic covers a smaller portfolio for one or two contributors; Core adds custom code, integrations, and unlimited contributors. The old Personal and Business prices should not be used as current guidance. See the current Squarespace plan guide.
Cargo and Readymag
Cargo and Readymag deserve more attention than they usually get in generic website-builder lists. Both make the most sense when the portfolio is an editorial or visual object, not simply a grid of SaaS case studies.
Cargo
A strong option for graphic designers, art directors, illustrators, photographers, and anyone who wants a more art-directed site. Cargo 3 now uses one plan rather than the old Pro and Pro Plus tiers.
Current price: $14 per month billed yearly or $19 monthly, including unlimited public Cargo-domain sites and one custom-domain connection. Cargo rates and services
Readymag
A strong option for editorial storytelling, controlled layouts across desktop, tablet, and mobile, and case studies that rely on sequence and pacing. It is less natural for a large, database-like project library.
Current plans: Free, Personal, Freelancer, and Business, with limits based on published projects, domains, views, and collaborators. Readymag plan guide
Other Options Worth Considering
Wix Studio: judge the current product, not old Wix
Wix Studio is a responsive editor with breakpoint controls, a CMS, custom code, a responsive checker, and accessibility tools. That is a different proposition from the older Wix editor this article used to dismiss. It makes the most sense if you already build client sites in Wix or need its business-app ecosystem. It may be more platform than a solo portfolio needs. Current Wix Studio editor guide
Carrd: the honest one-page placeholder
Carrd is useful when you need one clean page with an introduction, selected work, contact details, and links to deeper case studies elsewhere. Pro Standard is currently $19 per year and adds a custom domain, forms, analytics, embeds, and custom meta tags. It is not a replacement for a growing multi-project portfolio, but it is a better temporary answer than waiting months to publish anything. Carrd plan details
Adobe Portfolio: use what you already have
Adobe Portfolio is included with Creative Cloud and supports responsive themes, custom domains, password-protected pages, and Behance syncing. It is a reasonable way to publish a focused portfolio quickly when you already subscribe. Its narrower customization is a tradeoff, not proof that the work is less serious. Adobe Portfolio for designers
WordPress: choose it for the ecosystem
WordPress makes sense if you already know it, want a portfolio plus a substantial publication, need plugins, or care about self-hosting. WordPress.com currently includes managed hosting and allows plugins on paid plans. For a simple portfolio, that flexibility may be more system than you need. WordPress.com pricing
Custom code: choose it when the code is part of the work
Next.js, Astro, or a smaller static setup can give you full control and low hosting costs. It can also become a second product to maintain. This is the right choice for a design engineer, a front-end developer, or a designer who wants the site to demonstrate technical practice. It is not automatically more impressive than a clear portfolio built with a visual tool.
How to Choose Without Rebuilding Twice
- 1. Outline the portfolio before opening a builder. List the pages, projects, media, and password needs. A platform should support the structure you already understand.
- 2. Build the hardest case study first. Test the longest page, the trickiest media, the mobile reading experience, and any interaction you consider essential.
- 3. Check the paid plan you will actually need. A free editor is not the same as a free published site with a custom domain, CMS, redirects, or multiple collaborators.
- 4. Decide who will maintain it. If future you will avoid updating the site because the system is too fussy, the extra control is not helping.
- 5. Keep your source material portable. Save final copy, images, captions, and project data outside the platform so you can migrate without reconstructing the work itself.
Do not move a live portfolio just because another builder is newer. First ask what the current site is preventing you from doing. If the actual problem is that the project context is vague or the strongest work is buried, a migration only gives the same problem a new template.
What I Would Not Use as the Only Portfolio
A Figma Design file or prototype, not Figma Sites
A Design file is useful for a guided walkthrough, but access, navigation, responsive behavior, and public discoverability are too fragile for your only portfolio. Figma Sites is the actual publishing product and belongs in a different category.
Behance or Dribbble without a portfolio home
They can help people discover the work, but they give you less control over sequence, context, and the path between projects. Use them as distribution, not your only archive.
A builder chosen only because it supposedly “signals craft”
There is no platform shortcut around clear work. Choose the system that helps you publish, then make the finished experience coherent, readable, responsive, and specific to you.
For the decisions beyond the platform, the complete portfolio guide covers case-study structure, project selection, and presentation. You can also see what The Crit checks in a portfolio before you rebuild anything.
Everything You Need to Know
Quick answers to help you get started
Share this resource
Written by
Nikki KippleProduct Designer & Design Instructor
Designer, educator, founder of The Crit. I've spent years teaching interaction design and reviewing hundreds of student portfolios. Good feedback shouldn't require being enrolled in my class — so I built a tool that gives it to everyone. Connect on LinkedIn →
Before you rebuild your portfolio, find the real problem.
Send your portfolio URL or one section. We'll show what is unclear, what is hurting the first impression, and what to fix before switching platforms.
Continue Reading
All resources →Get one actionable portfolio tip every week. No fluff.
Short reads you can use on your site. Unsubscribe anytime.