Astro comes up often in Framer migration conversations because its whole design philosophy — ship close to zero JavaScript by default — is the direct answer to Framer's biggest performance criticism: a heavy runtime shipped to every visitor.
Why Astro specifically fits this use case
Most marketing sites, portfolios, and content sites built in Framer are mostly static — text, images, layout, maybe a few scroll animations. They don't need a full client-side JavaScript framework running on every page load. Astro's "islands" architecture ships plain HTML/CSS by default and only sends JavaScript for the specific interactive pieces that actually need it. For a Framer site whose interactivity is mostly appear/scroll animations (which can be reproduced with lightweight CSS + IntersectionObserver, no framework required), that's a strong architectural match.
Astro vs a Next.js export for this use case
Both are legitimate landing spots for an exported Framer site, and the right choice depends on what you're optimizing for:
- Astro wins on raw performance for content-heavy, low-interactivity sites — less JS shipped by default means faster Time to Interactive almost automatically.
- Next.js wins if you want a broader ecosystem, more first-party integration with things like Vercel's platform features, or you anticipate the site growing more interactive/app-like over time (Astro can do interactivity too, but Next.js's model is more naturally suited to it).
For a typical marketing site with scroll animations and not much else, Astro's performance ceiling is genuinely higher. For a site that might grow real app-like features later, Next.js avoids a second migration.
What the actual migration involves
FNJ now converts a published Framer site straight to an Astro project, alongside its HTML and Next.js outputs, so you no longer have to restructure exported HTML into Astro components by hand to get started. Like FNJ's other outputs, the Astro project keeps Framer's runtime, which loads from Framer's CDN along with fonts — so animations behave exactly as on Framer and the Framer project should stay published, but you don't get Astro's near-zero-JavaScript default until you rebuild sections by hand.
The honest recommendation
If raw performance is your single top priority and you're comfortable with some manual restructuring work, Astro is worth it — FNJ's Astro export gives you the project to start from, but the speed gain comes from your own rebuild, since the export keeps Framer's runtime. If you want the fastest path from "published on Framer" to "deployed somewhere I control" with the least manual effort, a direct Next.js, Astro or static HTML export gets you there today.
Starting a new site instead? FNJ's AI website builder designs one from a description and a site you like, then gives you the code to host anywhere.
