Craft.js vs Plasmic: an editor for your users or a studio for your designers

Different audiences, different products

Plasmic is used by designers, in Plasmic. Craft.js is used by developers, to build something their users will touch. Once stated that way the comparison mostly resolves, and what remains is worth saying because teams do put these two on the same list.

Where Plasmic wins

It exists. A complete design studio, a CMS, a loader and a code-generation path. On Craft.js you have a node tree.

Layout power for designers. Real positioning, responsive control, variants and slots.

No engineering time to first page. Register components and let designers work.

Two integration models, runtime or generated code, so your production dependency is a choice.

Where Craft.js wins

Your users can use it. The editor is a component in your application, not a vendor's website.

No vendor at all. MIT, free, no tiers, no seats, no availability dependency.

29.2 kB. The lightest option in this dataset, because it ships no interface.

Total control of interaction. Drop rules, drag behaviour and tree manipulation are yours, which matters when the editing surface has to match an unusual application — a canvas app, a diagram tool, a dashboard composer.

What each one costs you

Plasmic costs a subscription and a vendor relationship, and it costs you the option of ever giving that editor to your customers.

Craft.js costs the 120 hours our calculator attaches to building an editor interface, plus the settings forms, the layer tree and the block library. It buys you an editing experience nobody else has.

The mistake to avoid

Do not choose Craft.js because Plasmic is expensive. The subscription is not the expensive part of this decision; the quarter of engineering is. Choose Craft.js because you need an editor inside your product that looks like your product, and no supplied interface will do.

Equally, do not choose Plasmic because Craft.js looks like work. If your customers need to edit, Plasmic will not do the job at any price, and discovering that after a proof of concept is the more expensive mistake.

Migration

There is no path. Plasmic designs are a hosted project in a vendor model; Craft.js content is a JSON tree of your components in your database. Moving either way means rebuilding both the content and the editing experience.

Verdict

Designers, marketing pages, no customer-facing requirement: Plasmic — and compare it with Builder.io, which is its actual competitor.

Customer-facing editing where the interface is your differentiator: Craft.js, with the interface work budgeted honestly. If you want that customer-facing editing without building the interface, Puck is the option this pairing tends to hide.

Decision checklist

1. Who uses the editor? Customers point to Craft.js; designers point to Plasmic.
2. Is the editor interface part of our product's identity? If yes, no supplied studio will do.
3. How much of a design tool are we prepared to build? Answer honestly, then halve it.
4. Do we need a hosted CMS behind the pages? Plasmic includes one; on Craft.js it is another system.
5. What is our timeline to first customer use? Craft.js measures in months.

The number that matters

29.2 kB — the smallest bundle in our benchmark, and a misleading advantage in this comparison. Craft.js is small because it ships no interface, and the interface is precisely what Plasmic sells. Comparing these two on bundle size is comparing an engine block with a car.