Skip to content
RU

Headless CMS in 2026: why the share cannot be measured from outside

TL;DR. We parsed 401 home pages and found signs of a headless content management system on eleven.

We parsed 401 home pages and found signs of a headless content management system on eleven. Against roughly a third for traditional systems.

It is tempting to conclude that "headless holds 2.7%", but that would be wrong. A headless system leaves no trace in markup — that is its whole point, and our measurement sees only those that left one by accident. The same limitation binds every published survey of this market.

Check your site's headers →

Measured: headless found on 11 pages of 401

On 27 August 2026 we parsed the markup of 401 home pages (150 hosts per zone, drawn from those users brought to our tools) and looked for content management system fingerprints.

Traditional systems:

ZoneParsedWordPressBitrixTildaDrupal
.ru10411 (11%)23 (22%)8 (8%)2 (2%)
.com11722 (19%)1 (1%)2 (2%)0
.org1068 (8%)3 (3%)1 (1%)1 (1%)
.net744 (5%)1 (1%)00

Headless systems, across all four zones combined:

SystemPages
Contentful7
Strapi4
Sanity, Storyblok, Prismic, Directus, Hygraph, Payload0

That is 11 pages of 401 — 2.7%, against roughly a third for traditional systems.

And why this measurement undercounts by design, not by error

Here is the substance, and it matters more than the figures.

A headless system leaves no trace in markup — that is its whole point. A traditional CMS signs itself: WordPress leaves /wp-content/ in paths and a generator meta tag, Bitrix leaves /bitrix/. A headless system serves content over an interface while a front-end framework assembles the page. Nothing in the resulting HTML points to the source.

Our seven Contentful sites were found only because images load from its own delivery network and the address is visible in the markup. A project caching those images itself would become invisible.

Hence the honest conclusion: 2.7% is not the share of headless systems but the share of those that happened to leave a trace. The true figure is higher, and by how much cannot be determined from outside.

The bias is moreover asymmetric: we see nearly all traditional systems and nearly no headless ones. So comparing "2.7% against 30%" is invalid — it compares not two shares but the detection completeness of two different classes.

The same limit binds everyone who measures this

Our method is not worse than the accepted one — it is the same one. Major CMS market surveys work exactly this way: crawl pages and look for fingerprints. So the limitation is common to all of them, and every published headless share is understated for the same reason.

The Web Almanac acknowledges it outright: detection tools identify a technology by a recognisable trace, and "unless these tools leave detectible fingerprints, we are unable to measure their usage". That statement applies to every such measurement, ours included.

There is a second source of bias that gets discussed less. The home page is what gets checked. Large projects often keep the front page on a static generator while using a headless system for a blog or a documentation section. Such a site enters the statistics as "no CMS".

What follows practically: treat any figure of the form "headless CMS share has grown to N%" as a lower bound with an unknown distance to the truth. It shows direction; it does not show magnitude.

What can be seen reliably

Despite all of the above, part of the measurement holds — the part concerning traditional systems, which are detected dependably.

In the .ru zone Bitrix is more common than WordPress — 22% against 11%. That reverses the international zones, where WordPress leads by a wide margin and Bitrix appears in single figures. Our cut agrees in direction with the W3Techs data, though our denominators differ and the numbers are not directly comparable.

Tilda appears only in .ru — eight pages against one or two across every other zone combined. For a builder aimed at one market that is expected, and the data confirms it.

Drupal and Joomla have all but vanished — one or two pages per zone. Systems that held a visible share ten years ago sit at the edge of visibility in our sample.

To see what is detected on a specific site, use the technology detector.

Learn more

Frequently Asked Questions

Strapi or Sanity — which?

Strapi — open-source + self-host, SQL backend. Sanity — SaaS, NoSQL, premium editor UX, real-time collaboration. For budget + self-host — Strapi. For editors-first — Sanity.

Headless CMS for a small blog — overkill?

Yes. Simple blog → Ghost, Astro + MDX, or WordPress. Headless needed when one content base serves multiple channels (web + mobile + TV).

Performance impact?

Headless = extra API call for content. But with caching (Redis/Next.js cache) — almost no overhead. Core Web Vitals usually better than WordPress direct.

How to detect a site's CMS?

Enterno Tech Detect identifies 30+ CMS. Or network tab → API endpoints.

Try the live tool that powered this guide

Free plan — 10 monitors, checks every 5 min, no card required. Upgrade for 1-minute interval and multi-region monitoring.