Static sites vs WordPress: which should you recommend?
Your client needs a website. You need to choose a technology. WordPress powers 43% of the web, but static site generators like Next.js and Astro are gaining ground fast — especially among agencies that care about performance and security. Here is an honest, data-driven comparison to help you make the right call for each project.
The technology landscape in 2025
WordPress is not going anywhere. It runs millions of sites, has a massive ecosystem, and most clients have heard of it. But the web has changed. Google now penalises slow sites through Core Web Vitals. Security breaches cost businesses an average of 4,500 EUR per incident for small sites. And clients increasingly expect instant load times.
Static site generators (SSGs) like Next.js, Astro, and Hugo take a different approach. Instead of generating pages on every visit (like WordPress), they pre-build every page as plain HTML. The result: sites that load in under 1 second, have zero database vulnerabilities, and cost almost nothing to host.
For agencies, the choice is not "which is better" — it is "which is right for this specific client." Let us compare them objectively.
Head-to-head comparison
Performance
Static HTML loads in 0.3-0.8 seconds. No database queries, no server processing. PageSpeed scores of 95-100 are the norm, not the exception. Every page is pre-built and served from a CDN edge node closest to the visitor.
WordPress generates pages dynamically, requiring PHP execution and database queries on every visit. Without heavy caching and optimisation, PageSpeed scores of 40-75 are typical. Plugins add additional HTTP requests and JavaScript.
Security
No database, no admin panel, no login page, no PHP. The attack surface is essentially zero. There is nothing to hack because there is no server-side code running. Hosting on Netlify or Vercel adds automatic SSL and DDoS protection.
WordPress is the most targeted CMS on the internet. Plugins, themes, and core updates must be applied promptly. WPScan reports 50,000+ known vulnerabilities in the ecosystem. Requires security plugins, strong passwords, and regular monitoring.
Hosting cost
Static sites can be hosted for free on Netlify, Vercel, or Cloudflare Pages (generous free tiers). Even premium hosting rarely exceeds 20 EUR/month. No database server, no PHP runtime, no server maintenance.
Decent WordPress hosting starts at 15 EUR/month for shared hosting (slow, unreliable). Managed WordPress hosting (WP Engine, Kinsta) costs 30-80 EUR/month for good performance. Database backups and SSL certificates may cost extra.
SEO capability
Lightning-fast load times directly improve Core Web Vitals rankings. Clean HTML output with proper semantic structure. Full control over meta tags, schema markup, and sitemap generation. No bloated plugin output.
Yoast SEO and Rank Math provide solid SEO tooling. But WordPress's dynamic nature, plugin bloat, and larger page sizes can hurt Core Web Vitals. Schema markup requires additional plugins or custom code.
Development time
A brochure site takes 5-10 working days. Custom builds with complex layouts take 10-15 days. No time spent on plugin configuration, security setup, or performance optimisation — these are built in.
WordPress can be faster for standard sites using premium themes. A brochure site with a good theme takes 3-7 days. But custom development (no page builder) takes 10+ days, and performance optimisation adds 2-3 days.
Client editing
Clients cannot edit static sites directly. A headless CMS (Sanity, Strapi, Contentful) adds a user-friendly editing interface. This adds setup time but provides a cleaner, faster editing experience than WordPress.
The WordPress admin panel is familiar to millions of users. Gutenberg and page builders (Elementor, Divi) make editing accessible. However, clients often break layouts, install unwanted plugins, or skip updates.
When to recommend a static site
Static sites are the right choice when:
Performance is a ranking factor
If your client cares about SEO (or you do SEO for them), a static site gives you a competitive edge in Core Web Vitals. This is especially relevant for local businesses competing in Google Maps and organic search.
The site is primarily informational
Brochure sites, portfolios, landing pages, service pages: anything where the content changes infrequently is a perfect fit. These sites do not need a database or dynamic content generation.
Security is a concern
For clients in regulated industries (healthcare, legal, finance) or those who have been hacked before, a static site eliminates the most common attack vectors entirely.
You want minimal ongoing maintenance
No plugin updates, no security patches, no database backups. A static site is essentially maintenance-free after launch. This means fewer support tickets and happier long-term clients.
Budget is limited but quality matters
Zero hosting costs and no ongoing maintenance make static sites the most cost-effective option over a 3-year horizon. The client gets a premium result without premium recurring costs.
When to recommend WordPress
WordPress is the right choice when:
The client needs frequent content editing
Blogs with daily posts, news sites, directories with user submissions: if content changes multiple times per week and the client's team must edit independently, WordPress's familiar interface is hard to beat.
E-commerce is required
WooCommerce powers 28% of all online stores. For clients who need a full shop with product management, inventory, payments, and shipping calculations, WordPress + WooCommerce is a battle-tested solution.
The client insists on WordPress
Some clients have existing WordPress sites, in-house developers who know WordPress, or simply a strong preference. Forcing a technology change creates friction and risks the client relationship.
Complex functionality is needed quickly
Membership sites, booking systems, multi-vendor marketplaces: WordPress plugins can deliver these features in days. Building equivalent functionality with a static stack takes significantly longer.
The project includes a large blog with multiple authors
WordPress's role-based access control, editorial workflow, and content scheduling are mature and well-tested. For a content team of 3+ writers publishing weekly, this matters.
The decision framework
Use this simple framework for every new project. Ask these four questions:
How often will content change?
Rarely (monthly or less) → Static. Frequently (weekly+) → WordPress or static + headless CMS.
Does the client need e-commerce?
Simple (< 20 products) → Shopify or static + Snipcart. Complex (inventory, shipping) → WooCommerce.
How important is performance and SEO?
Critical (local SEO, competitive keywords) → Static. Nice-to-have → Either works.
What is the total 3-year budget?
Tight → Static (zero hosting cost). Flexible → Choose based on other factors.
In our experience, 70-80% of agency client projects — local businesses, professionals, service companies — are best served by a static site. The remaining 20-30% need WordPress for its content management, e-commerce, or specific plugin functionality.