What you get with each option: code, portability, and exit costs. Including the fine print for Wix, Squarespace, and Webflow, and the Spanish Intellectual Property Law.
A template gives you quick design and a subscription dependency. No-code gives you speed and an expensive exit. AI gives you a draft that someone needs to audit. A bespoke website gives you code, source files, and the freedom to leave. You aren't choosing a tool: you are choosing who controls your website three years from now.
Almost every article comparing these four options discusses the same things: unique vs. repeated design, loading speed, and initial cost. None of them tell you which files you get the day you leave, who owns the exploitation rights to the code, or what each platform exports when you ask for your assets. That is what determines the real cost. And that is what we are going to put on the table.
Here you won't find a one-size-fits-all recommendation. You will find four options defined without ambiguity, five assets you are buying without knowing it, the fine print of exports as published by the platforms themselves, and a six-question decision tree.
The four options, defined without ambiguity
The first problem with the debate is one of vocabulary. The same word means different things depending on who is sending the invoice.
Bespoke web
A custom system is designed (grid, typographic scale, components, states) and programmed against that system. It can be built on a content management system, a framework, or a decoupled architecture. What defines it is not the technology: it is the fact that the design and code exist as files that are delivered to you and function outside of the tool used to create them.
A bespoke website is not an expensive website: it is a website whose ownership and destiny are written in a contract.
Template
You buy an already built theme (WordPress, Shopify, a theme marketplace) and fill it with your content and colors. The design belongs to someone else and is shared with thousands of businesses. The logic is, too. You provide the content and adjustments.
No-code / visual builder
Wix, Squarespace, Webflow, Framer, and similar. You design or assemble within a proprietary interface and the result lives on that company's infrastructure. There are two sub-families here that should not be mixed: closed builders (Wix, Squarespace) and builders with partial output (Webflow, with code export under conditions detailed below).
AI
A model generates the mockup, text, or code from instructions. This ranges from one-click website generators to assisted development where a human team directs the model. The difference between these two extremes is enormous, and almost no one makes it explicit. We separate them: AI is not a product category, it is a way of producing. The question that matters is not who wrote the code, but who has read it afterwards.
These four words do not name four prices: these four words name four ways of distributing the ownership of your website.
You aren't actually buying a design: you are buying five assets
When you ask for a quote, you think you are buying a visual look. You are buying five things, and only one of them is visible.
- Ownership. Who holds the exploitation rights to the code, the design, and the source files.
- Portability. What you take with you if you change providers or platforms tomorrow.
- Control. What you can change without asking for permission or paying for development.
- Permanence cost. What you pay each month for three years just to keep the website running.
- Legal liability. Who is responsible regarding GDPR, the Law 11/2023 on accessibility, and your clients.
The four options score differently on each asset. None win on all five. Choosing well means knowing which of those five assets is going to hurt the most.
| Bespoke | Template | Closed no-code | No-code with export | AI without direction | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deliverable source code | Yes, complete | Partial (theme belongs to 3rd party) | No | Partial and static | Yes, but unaudited |
| Design files | Yes | Usually none | Inside the tool | Inside the tool | No |
| Migrating provider | Direct | Direct | Redo | Redo backend | Direct, if someone understands it |
| Mandatory monthly cost | Hosting and domain | Hosting, domain, licenses | Platform subscription | Platform subscription | Hosting and domain |
| Adaptation to legal requirements | Total | Limited by theme | Limited by platform | Limited by platform | Requires full review |
| Time to publish | Weeks | Days | Days | Days or weeks | Hours |
The portability test: what happens the day you leave
This is the section you won't read on the sites currently ranking for this search. And it is the only one you can verify without taking anyone's word for it: just read the support documentation for each platform.
Wix. Wix's own documentation puts it bluntly: "In order for your site to work properly, it needs to be hosted and operated on Wix's servers", adding that "the SaaS architecture does not support external hosting since it uses Wix's proprietary technology and relies on Wix's services to operate" (Wix Help Center, "Exporting or Embedding Your Wix Site Elsewhere" · consulted 08-27-2026). In translation: your domain is yours and your content can be copied by hand. The website, however, cannot. Leaving Wix means rebuilding the website.
Squarespace. Exports an .xml file intended to be imported into WordPress. According to their own support, the export excludes: stores, portfolios, indexes, albums, calendars, secondary blogs, drafts, audio, video and product blocks, style settings, and custom CSS. And a phrase worth underlining: "It's not possible to export content from one Squarespace site and import it into another" (Squarespace Help Center, "Exporting your site" · consulted 08-27-2026). In other words: you take the text of a blog. You do not take the website.
Webflow. Allows for code export, but with two conditions rarely mentioned. The first: "Code export is only available on Workspace plans — that is, Site plans do not include the ability to export your site's code". The second, the one that matters: "CMS, User Accounts, Ecommerce content (databases), code components and functionality, and localized pages, elements, and content aren't included in exported code", and "Site search and forms (including file upload and reCAPTCHA) will not work on exported sites" (Webflow Help Center, "How do I export my Webflow site code" · consulted 08-27-2026). You take the HTML, CSS, and images. You do not take the content manager, the forms, or the store.
Bespoke web. You take the repository, the design source files, and the documentation. Portability is not a feature of the product: it is a clause in the contract.
The industry standard: The industry sells the comparison on a price-time axis, because it is the axis on which the cheap option always wins.
Our criteria: We place it on an ownership-portability axis, because it is the axis that decides what the third year will cost you.
This does not make Wix or Squarespace bad options. It makes them options with an exit cost that you must know before entering, not after. If your website is a five-page business card that you aren't going to move for five years, that exit cost is irrelevant. If your website is the channel through which the bulk of your commercial contacts arrive, it is the most expensive line item in the project.
Code ownership: what the LPI says and what your budget hides
There is a misunderstanding in Spain that costs money every month. Many people assume that if they pay for a website, the website is theirs. The Intellectual Property Law (Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996) does not work like that.
Article 43.1 establishes that assigned exploitation rights are limited to the specifically granted rights, to the expressly foreseen modes of exploitation, and to the time and territorial scope determined. 43.2 finishes this: "The failure to mention time limits the transfer to five years and the failure to mention territorial scope limits it to the country where the transfer is made".
Five years. If your quote does not mention the term of the transfer, you are assuming it by default.
With code, the nuance is different and more uncomfortable. Article 97.4 of the same law states: "When a salaried employee creates a computer program in the exercise of the functions entrusted to him or following the instructions of his employer, the ownership of the exploitation rights corresponding to the computer program so created, both the source program and the object program, shall belong exclusively to the employer, unless otherwise agreed". Read that carefully: salaried employee. An external studio is not your employee. A freelancer who invoices you is not your employee. That article does not protect you: you need an express and written assignment.
- Exclusive assignment of exploitation rights for design and bespoke code
- Temporal scope: full legal duration of protection. Territorial scope: worldwide
- Express mention of source code, design source files, and technical documentation
- Access to the repository from day one, not just at the handover
- Which components are third-party and under what license (GPL, MIT, commercial theme license)
- Whether the price includes VAT or is separate, stated in those exact terms
Watch out for the last point in the list above in the case of templates: when you buy a commercial theme, you do not acquire ownership of it; you acquire a license to use it. You can use it. You cannot resell it or claim it as your own work. That is perfectly legitimate, and it is also the reason why a template can never be an asset of your company. It is a good-looking rental.
Price: why the four figures are not comparable
Comparing a monthly subscription with a one-time payment is like comparing a rental with a purchase. They should be compared over three years, and compared with all items included.
Public figures verified today:
Three observations that almost no Spanish article makes regarding these prices.
First: they are in dollars. Framer, Webflow, and Shopify publish their rates in USD, even on their Spanish-language websites. Your real cost depends on the exchange rate of the day of each charge, and your accounting has to resolve the VAT on an intra-community service or non-EU service, with reverse charge and, when applicable, recapitulary statements. This is not a fiscal anecdote: it is a line item for your accounting firm every quarter.
Second: the site plan does not include export. In Webflow, exporting code also requires a paid Workspace plan. The invoice for "having the website" and the invoice for "being able to take it with you" are two separate invoices.
Third: VAT. In Spain, web design and development services are taxed at the general rate of 21% (VAT Law 37/1992, art. 90). If you are a freelancer or a company with the right to deduct, that 21% is not a cost. If you do not have it (an association, an exempt activity, an individual), it is, and it changes the entire comparison.
Explicit calculation, so you can redo it: a Webflow Basic subscription at $15/month with annual billing is $180 per year and $540 over three years, before the domain, before the Workspace plan needed to export, and before any hours of human labor. It is an arithmetic estimate based on public prices, not a forecast: if Webflow changes its rates, the number changes.
| Item | Figure | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Listen and Define | — | — |
| Trace and Design (system, grid, typographic rhythm) | — | — |
| Build (front, integrations, CI/CD) | — | — |
| Content and migration | — | — |
| Launch and support (testing, accessibility, handover) | — | — |
— = data being measured; we will publish it once we have our own sample.
The four tiers of our form (less than 10k / 10k-25k / 25k-50k / more than 50k €) are not quality tiers: they are scope tiers. You cannot create a complete design system plus bespoke development plus content migration for less than 10k €. You do one of those three things well. We tell you this before the proposal, not after.
Performance: three numbers that don't allow for opinion
Performance is discussed a lot and measured very little. Google publishes three thresholds and they are the same for everyone, whether you used a template or a proprietary framework.
LCP measures when the main element appears: good if it happens in 2.5 seconds or less. INP measures response to interaction: good with 200 milliseconds or less. INP replaced FID and has been a stable metric since 2024. CLS measures unexpected content movement: good with 0.1 or less.
What almost no one clarifies is this: a template doesn't fail because it's a template. It fails when it accumulates functionality you don't use. The problem isn't the origin of the theme, it's the amount of code downloaded to paint a page that only needs text and images. A bespoke website doesn't automatically pass either: we have seen bespoke projects with three variable typefaces loaded in the head and an uncompressed video in the header.
Measuring is cheap. Having an opinion is expensive.
Accessibility: the law doesn't ask which tool you used to make the website
Law 11/2023, of May 8 (BOE-A-2023-11022), transposes Directive (EU) 2019/882 —the European Accessibility Act— and its Title I is applicable from June 28, 2025. It affects, among others, e-commerce, banking services, passenger transport, travel agencies, and audiovisual communication services.
Two nuances that are rarely told together:
- Service-providing micro-enterprises are exempt. A micro-enterprise is understood as one that has fewer than 10 employees and does not exceed 2 million euros in annual turnover or annual balance sheet. If you sell online and are a micro-enterprise, the obligation does not reach you through that channel. Just because it doesn't oblige you doesn't mean it isn't in your interest.
- There is a transitional regime. Services provided with existing products can continue until June 28, 2030, and service contracts already concluded can continue without modification for a maximum of five years.
The law mandates the service, not the tool. It doesn't matter if your store is on a template, in a builder, or made to order: the requirement is the same. And here the difference between options is practical, not legal: in a bespoke website, you can correct contrast, focus order, or an aria-label in the same day. In a closed builder, you can correct what the platform lets you correct.
Dates and thresholds of Law 11/2023 verified in the consolidated text of the BOE on 08-27-2026. The transitional regime and exceptions for micro-enterprises depend on your specific case: this is information, not legal advice.
Kit Digital: what you need to know before you're sold on it
Red.es closed the last two calls for the Kit Digital program that remained open on October 31, 2025: the one for freelancers and companies with between 0 and fewer than 3 employees, and the one for communities of property, civil societies, and shared-ownership agricultural holdings (Red.es, press release 10-31-2025). As of August 27, 2026, there is no open application call. Already granted vouchers continue their justification process. If someone offers you "a free website with the Kit Digital" today without you having a granted voucher, ask them to show you the resolution.
This matters in this comparison for a specific reason: a good portion of the template websites sold in Spain between 2022 and 2025 were sold within that program, with a scope defined by the aid catalog. If your current website came from there and you want to know exactly what you have, start by looking for the technical report of the justified project.
The AI option, measured honestly
AI is the novelty of this comparison and the one being told the worst. In both directions: it neither replaces a team nor is it a source of automatic garbage.
What is verifiable, first.
About the code. Veracode published its GenAI Code Security Report on July 30, 2025: it tested more than 100 language models in Java, Python, C#, and JavaScript, and 45% of the code samples failed security tests, introducing vulnerabilities from the OWASP Top 10. By language: Java 72%, C# 45%, JavaScript 43%, Python 38%. In Cross-Site Scripting (CWE-80), models failed in 86% of relevant cases. The uncomfortable finding of the report is another: the newest and largest models did not generate more secure code.
About the content. Google Search spam policies do not penalize AI for being AI. They penalize scaled content abuse, and define it by including "using generative AI tools or other similar tools to generate many pages without adding value for users", with an explicit clarification: "no matter how it's created" (Google Search Central, Spam policies · consulted 08-27-2026). The tool is indifferent. The value is not.
Now the studio reading.
The industry standard: Forbidding AI in the process and charging for it as if nothing had changed, or generating an entire website with a model and delivering it without auditing it.
Our criteria: Use AI where it accelerates —grid variants, first versions of a component, testing, alt texts— and audit line by line what touches on security, accessibility, and personal data.
A website generated by AI in an afternoon is an excellent draft and a terrible product. It serves to show a direction, to validate a structure, for a founder to understand what they are asking for. It does not serve to process a payment, to handle health data, or to sustain a company's commercial channel without anyone having read the code.
And there is a specific case that we already see coming through our form: the rescue. Someone built an MVP with AI, it worked well enough to get the first users, and now no one knows why it fails. Rescuing costs less than redoing only when the architecture is recoverable. When it is not, we say so: redoing is cheaper than patching.
Decision tree: six questions, in this order
Answer out loud. The first answer that is a firm "no" disqualifies options.
- Does your website generate direct revenue or measurable business contacts? If not, start cheap. A template or a builder is the right decision. You will come back when there is something to optimize.
- Do you need something that the platform doesn't do out of the box? A calculation, an integration with your ERP, a custom booking flow, a configurator. If the answer is yes, no-code ends there or forces you to glue together third-party services that add up subscriptions.
- Are you going to migrate existing content with ranking history? If there are URLs with traffic, the migration is a project in itself, and the destination platform determines what can be kept.
- Do you have specific legal obligations? Accessibility under Law 11/2023, sensitive data processing, regulated sectors. The more specific the obligation, the less margin a closed environment leaves you.
- Who will maintain it two years from now? If it is your internal team without a technical profile, a builder wins. If it is a technical team, bespoke code wins.
- How much would it cost you to leave? Add it up before you enter. If the number scares you, you already have the answer.
When each is the right choice
The template is right when you need an orderly digital presence, you have fewer than ten pages, your differentiation is not on the website, and you prefer to invest the budget elsewhere. Also when you are validating: a decent template published this month is worth more than a perfect bespoke website in four months.
No-code is right when the team that will edit the website is not technical, the content structure is stable, and the design matters enough to not accept a generic theme. Webflow and Framer allow for a level of visual control that a template does not give. You accept the subscription and accept the exit cost in exchange for daily autonomy.
AI is right as a tool within a process, and as a disposable prototype outside of it. It is the cheapest way to discover that you didn't want what you asked for.
The bespoke website is right when at least one of these four is met: the website is a measurable revenue channel, there is proprietary functionality that no platform covers, the brand needs its own system that can be supported on other media, or code ownership is a requirement (investment, audit, contract with a large client).
And there is a fifth case that doesn't appear in any comparison: when you have already paid twice to redo the same website. It is better that the third one be yours.
How we work
We don't sell technology. We start by asking, not proposing. If what you need is a template, we tell you that in the first 30-minute call and we don't send you a proposal.
| # | Phase | What we do | Deliverables |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01 | Listen | We start by asking, not proposing. | Interviews · Audit of what you already have · Agreed brief |
| 02 | Define | We agree on what winning means before moving a pixel. | Objectives · Closed scope · Success criteria |
| 03 | Trace | Structure and content before aesthetics. | Architecture · Flows · Content inventory |
| 04 | Design | A system, not a collection of screens. | Grid · Typographic rhythm · Components and states |
| 05 | Build | Legible, versioned, and deployable code. | Repository from day one · CI/CD · Accessibility and performance testing |
| 06 | Launch and support | Launch is a checklist, not a leap of faith. | Redirects · Measurement · Handover with documentation · 30 days of support |
Fixed price per phase, agreed before starting. No surprise hours. Brand and website in 6-12 weeks; digital product in 8-week phases. Upon finishing, we deliver code, source files, and documentation, so your team can continue without us. We accept a limited number of projects per year, which is why we say no frequently.
Errors we see repeated
- Comparing entry price instead of the 36-month cost with all subscriptions included
- Accepting a budget that doesn't name the source code or design files in the assignment
- Choosing a platform before deciding what the website needs to do
- Taking for granted that a bespoke website passes Core Web Vitals without measuring them
- Contracting a migration without a prior inventory of URLs with traffic
- Confusing "an AI made it" with "it's badly done," and also with "it's well done"
- Paying for a website without having access to the repository from the first commit
There isn't one good option and three bad ones. There is a decision about who is in charge of your website three years from now, and that decision is made today, with or without information.
Do you want to tell us what you have in front of you and we'll tell you which of the four applies?
Frequently asked questions
Does a bespoke website rank better on Google than a template?
Not because it's bespoke: the one that loads fast, has a clean semantic structure, and content that answers what is being searched for ranks better. A lightweight and well-configured template can outperform a neglected bespoke development, and we have seen it.
Can I start with a template and move to bespoke later?
Yes, and it is usually the sensible route if you are validating the business. Keep the migration cost in mind from the beginning: if you choose a closed platform, that jump means redoing, not moving.
Is it legal to use AI to make my website?
Yes. Google does not penalize the use of AI as such, but rather content without value generated at scale, according to its own spam policies. What is yours is the risk: the generated code needs security and accessibility auditing before hitting production.
Do platform prices include VAT?
The prices published by Webflow, Framer, or Shopify are in dollars and exclusive of taxes. As a Spanish business owner or professional, you will receive an invoice without VAT and will have to self-liquidate it; check with your accounting firm how to declare it in your case.
What happens if I contract a bespoke website and the studio disappears?
If you have the repository, the source files, and the documentation, any other team can continue. If you don't have them, the studio hasn't disappeared: they have taken your website with them. That is why we ask that repository access be in your name from day one.
Keep reading
- Which platform to choose for your website in 2026: WordPress, builder, headless, or bespoke
- I've seen free websites made with AI: why pay for one
- I have an MVP made with AI that doesn't work: how much does it cost to rescue it
- How to do web design with Claude and other AIs without it being noticeable
- Who owns my website code: intellectual property and work for hire in Spain
- Total cost of a website over 36 months: the number almost no one gives you
Transparency note. Some of our own data in this guide is still being measured on real projects, with a single method. We will publish it with its sample size and date range once the sample is large enough; until then, every figure you see carries its source and date of consultation.
Verified Sources
- https://support.wix.com/en/article/exporting-or-embedding-your-wix-site-elsewhere — Wix states that the site must be hosted and operated on Wix servers and that its SaaS architecture does not support external hosting. Basis for the portability section and the 0-figure data block.
- https://support.squarespace.com/hc/en-us/articles/206566687-Exporting-your-site — Official list of what Squarespace exports (.xml for WordPress) and what it does NOT export: stores, portfolios, indexes, albums, calendars, additional blogs, drafts, audio/video/product blocks, styles and custom CSS; and that it cannot be imported from one Squarespace to another.
- https://help.webflow.com/hc/en-us/articles/33961386739347-How-do-I-export-my-Webflow-site-code — Code export only on paid Workspace plans; export excludes CMS, User Accounts, Ecommerce, code components, and localized pages; search and forms do not work after export.
- https://webflow.com/pricing — Verified prices: Basic $15/mo and Premium $25/mo with annual billing; Workspace plans from $16-19/mo. Used in the price data block and the 3-year calculation.
- https://www.framer.com/pricing/ — Verified prices: Free 0, Basic $10/mo, Pro $30/mo; additional editor $20/mo. Used in the price data block.
- https://www.shopify.com/es/precios — Confirms that Shopify publishes rates in USD also on its Spanish website and commissions for external gateways (2% / 1% / 0.6% / 0.2%). Supports the point about dollar billing.
- https://web.dev/articles/vitals — Official Core Web Vitals thresholds: LCP ≤ 2.5 s, INP ≤ 200 ms, CLS ≤ 0.1; INP replaced FID and is stable since 2024. Performance data block.
- https://www.boe.es/buscar/act.php?id=BOE-A-2023-11022 — Consolidated text of Law 11/2023: Title I applicable from 06-28-2025, transitional regime until 06-28-2030, and five years for service contracts already concluded. Accessibility section and warning block.
- https://www.iberley.es/noticias/entra-vigor-ley-11-2023-que-regula-accesibilidad-los-canales-digitales-35022 — Detail of affected sectors and the exemption for service-providing micro-enterprises (fewer than 10 employees and up to €2M in turnover or annual balance).
- https://www.iberley.es/legislacion/articulo-97-ley-propiedad-intelectual — Literal text of art. 97.4 LPI on computer programs created by a salaried employee. Basis for the argument that this article does not cover an external studio or a freelancer.
- https://www.iberley.es/legislacion/articulo-43-ley-propiedad-intelectual — Text of art. 43.1 and 43.2 LPI: restrictive interpretation of transfer; without mention of time, five years; without mention of territory, the country of transfer. "5 years" data block.
- https://www.red.es/es/actualidad/noticias/kit-digital-cierra-las-dos-ultimas-convocatorias-que-quedaban-abiertas-tras-mas — Red.es press release 10-31-2025: closure of the last two Kit Digital calls. Basis for the verified status warning block.
- https://developers.google.com/search/docs/essentials/spam-policies — "Scaled content abuse" policy: literal quote on the use of generative AI to produce many pages without value and the clarification "no matter how it's created". AI section.
- https://www.veracode.com/blog/genai-code-security-report/ — GenAI Code Security Report (07-30-2025): more than 100 models tested, 45% of samples with OWASP Top 10 security flaws; Java 72%, C# 45%, JavaScript 43%, Python 38%; XSS (CWE-80) failed in 86% of relevant cases. AI section data block.
Want to see this thinking applied to a real project?