Framer's animations — appear effects, scroll reveals, hover transitions, variant switches — aren't baked into the HTML. They're produced at runtime by Framer's own bundled JavaScript engine reading instructions embedded in the page. That single fact determines everything about what happens to your animations when you export, because export tools make a choice about that runtime, and the choice is the whole story.
Option A: keep the runtime — animations are identical
If a conversion keeps Framer's runtime intact (as every FNJ output does), your animations don't change at all, because the exact same engine is still running them. Every easing curve, every stagger, every scroll-linked effect behaves byte-for-byte like the original. The tradeoff is that you're also keeping that runtime's weight — which is why this mode preserves fidelity but doesn't improve performance. We measured that tradeoff across 10 real templates here.
Option B: strip the runtime — animations get rebuilt
If a conversion strips Framer's runtime to make the page lighter and faster, the animations that depended on that runtime can no longer play as-is. A converter that does this rebuilds the common ones — appear-on-load and scroll-into-view reveals — using a lightweight CSS-plus-IntersectionObserver layer that reproduces the effect without the heavy engine. FNJ doesn't offer this option: all three of its exports — HTML, Next.js and Astro — keep Framer's runtime, so your animations play as authored rather than being rebuilt.
What translates cleanly, and what doesn't
The reveal-style animations — fade-up, fade-in, slide-in on scroll — rebuild faithfully, because they map naturally onto CSS transitions triggered by an intersection observer. What doesn't translate 1:1 are the effects that are genuinely runtime-driven in a way CSS can't cheaply replicate: complex physics-based motion, tightly scroll-synced parallax sequences, and elaborate multi-state interactive components. On an animation-heavy site, those are where a runtime-stripping export would show a difference.
How to decide
If your site's animations are the point — an interactive showcase, a motion-design portfolio — keep the runtime and accept the weight (Option A). That is the route all three of FNJ's exports take; FNJ doesn't offer Option B, so your reveals keep running on Framer's own engine, loaded from Framer's CDN (which is why the Framer project should stay published). The safe move is to try the HTML export first and compare it against the original visually and in PageSpeed Insights: it lightens images and removes trackers, but most of the original JavaScript still loads, so judge the speed on your own numbers.
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.
