WordPress vs static sites: which is right for you?

WordPress powers over 40% of websites. Static sites are faster, more secure, and often cheaper to run. Both have their place, but choosing the wrong one costs time, money, and performance.

This comparison covers performance, security, maintenance, costs, and when each approach makes sense for your business.

What is a static site?

A static site is pre-built HTML, CSS, and JavaScript files served directly to visitors. No database, no server-side processing, no PHP. Just files.

Static sites are built using tools like Eleventy, Astro, or Next.js (static export), then deployed to hosting like Netlify, Vercel, or Cloudflare Pages.

What is WordPress?

WordPress is a content management system (CMS) that builds pages on-demand using PHP and a database. You log in, edit content, and WordPress generates pages when visitors arrive.

WordPress includes themes, plugins, and an admin interface for managing content without code.

Performance: static sites win

Static sites are faster because they serve pre-built files. No database queries, no PHP processing, no plugin overhead [1]Source 1 .

Static sites

• Page load times: Typically 0.5-2 seconds
• Core Web Vitals: Usually excellent (LCP under 2.5s, CLS near zero)
• Page weight: Often 100-500KB (lean HTML/CSS/JS)
• Server response: Fast (just file serving)

WordPress

• Page load times: Typically 2-5 seconds (can be slower with plugins)
• Core Web Vitals: Often needs optimisation (LCP can be 3-5s+)
• Page weight: Often 1-3MB (theme, plugins, WordPress core)
• Server response: Slower (PHP + database queries)

Google uses Core Web Vitals in ranking decisions [2]Source 2 . Faster sites rank better and convert more.

Security: static sites win

Static sites have a smaller attack surface. No database, no login forms, no plugins to exploit.

Static sites

• Attack surface: Minimal (just file serving)
• Updates: Only when you rebuild (infrequent)
• Vulnerabilities: Rare (no server-side code execution)
• Backups: Simple (just files)

WordPress

• Attack surface: Large (WordPress core, themes, plugins, database)
• Updates: Frequent (core, plugins, themes need regular updates)
• Vulnerabilities: Common (WordPress is a frequent target [3]Source 3 )
• Backups: More complex (database + files)

WordPress sites need regular security updates, monitoring, and hardening [4]Source 4 . Static sites need less ongoing security work.

Maintenance: static sites win (usually)

Static sites need less ongoing maintenance. WordPress needs regular updates, plugin management, and monitoring.

Static sites

• Updates: Only when you add features or content
• Plugins: None (no plugin ecosystem)
• Monitoring: Minimal (just hosting uptime)
• Backups: Simple (version control handles it)

WordPress

• Updates: Regular (core, plugins, themes)
• Plugins: Need management, updates, compatibility checks
• Monitoring: Security, performance, uptime
• Backups: Database + files (more complex)

WordPress maintenance can take 2-5 hours per month. Static sites often need less than 1 hour per month.

Costs: static sites win (usually)

Static sites are cheaper to host and maintain. WordPress hosting and maintenance costs add up.

Static sites

• Hosting: Often free or £5-20/month (Netlify, Vercel, Cloudflare Pages)
• Maintenance: Minimal (fewer updates needed)
• Plugins: None (no plugin costs)
• Total: Often £0-50/month

WordPress

• Hosting: £10-50/month (managed WordPress hosting)
• Maintenance: £50-200/month (updates, monitoring, backups)
• Plugins: £0-100/month (premium plugins, themes)
• Total: Often £60-350/month

Static sites are cheaper long-term, especially for small businesses and charities.

Content management: WordPress wins

WordPress makes content editing easy. Static sites need more technical knowledge or a headless CMS.

WordPress

• Editing: Easy (admin interface, WYSIWYG editor)
• Non-technical users: Can edit content easily
• Workflow: Login, edit, publish

Static sites

• Editing: More technical (markdown, Git, or headless CMS)
• Non-technical users: Need training or a headless CMS
• Workflow: Edit files, commit, deploy (or use CMS)

Static sites can use headless CMS options (Sanity, Contentful, Strapi) for easier content editing, but this adds cost and complexity.

When to choose WordPress

WordPress makes sense when:

• You need easy content editing: Non-technical users need to edit content regularly
• You need plugins: E-commerce (WooCommerce), forums, membership sites
• You publish frequently: Blog posts, news, events multiple times per week
• You have a team: Multiple people need to edit content
• Budget allows maintenance: You can afford £50-200/month for maintenance

When to choose a static site

Static sites make sense when:

• Performance matters: You need fast load times and good Core Web Vitals
• Security is a priority: You want a smaller attack surface
• Content changes infrequently: You update content monthly or less
• You want lower costs: You want cheaper hosting and maintenance
• You have technical skills: You or your team can handle markdown/Git
• You are a small business or charity: You need cost-effective, low-maintenance sites

Hybrid approach: static site + headless CMS

You can get the best of both worlds: a static site for performance and security, plus a headless CMS for easy content editing.

How it works:

• Content lives in a headless CMS (Sanity, Contentful, Strapi)
• Static site builds from CMS content
• Non-technical users edit content in the CMS
• Site rebuilds automatically when content changes

This gives you static site performance with WordPress-like content editing, but costs more (£20-100/month for CMS).

Making the decision

Ask yourself:

• How often do you update content? Daily/weekly = WordPress. Monthly/rarely = static site.
• Who edits content? Non-technical users = WordPress. Technical users = static site.
• What is your budget? Tight budget = static site. Higher budget = WordPress with maintenance.
• Do you need plugins? Yes = WordPress. No = static site.
• Is performance critical? Yes = static site. Less critical = WordPress (with optimisation).

Summary

WordPress wins for easy content editing, plugin ecosystem, and frequent publishing. It costs more and needs more maintenance.

Static sites win for performance, security, low costs, and minimal maintenance. They need more technical knowledge or a headless CMS for easy editing.

Most small businesses and charities are better off with static sites unless they need frequent content updates or specific WordPress plugins.

For more on static sites, see static sites expertise. If you need help deciding or building your site, get in touch or see website build services.