You’re comparing Webflow and Framer for SEO because you want your B2B website to rank well without running into platform limitations as you scale. Both platforms promise SEO-friendly websites, and at first glance, their feature lists look similar. The differences show up when you start doing the work that actually moves rankings: publishing content at scale, managing hundreds of redirects during a restructure, or expanding into new markets with localized content.
Framer’s SEO is often “good enough” for a simple marketing site. But B2B companies with longer sales cycles and content-driven growth strategies need more than good enough. A platform that limits your redirect management, offers less control over CMS-level SEO fields, or forces manual workarounds for international targeting creates friction that compounds over time.
This guide breaks down how each platform handles the specific SEO requirements B2B teams care about: technical foundations, on-page controls, content SEO at scale, redirect management, and international SEO. We’ll be specific about where Webflow leads, where Framer holds its own, and where the gap matters most.
For a full platform comparison covering design, CMS, pricing, and team workflow, see our complete Webflow vs Framer guide.
We build on Webflow at Spect Agency, so we’ll be upfront about that bias. That said, Framer’s SEO capabilities are genuinely sufficient for certain use cases, and we’ll be clear about when that’s the case.
One important note: SEO performance on either platform depends on build quality. A bloated Webflow site with unoptimized images and excessive custom code will underperform a clean Framer build. The comparisons below assume a properly built site on each platform.
How SEO works in Webflow vs Framer
Webflow SEO for B2B websites
Webflow treats SEO as a core platform feature rather than an add-on. Meta tags, sitemaps, redirects, canonical URLs, robots directives, and schema markup generation are all built into the platform. You configure SEO settings in the same interface where you build and edit pages.
Where Webflow really separates itself for B2B is at the CMS level. Every blog post, case study, or resource page can have unique, well-configured metadata, including custom title tags, descriptions, canonical URLs, and Open Graph settings. This granular control matters when you’re publishing dozens of content pages per month, each targeting a different keyword.
Webflow also generates clean, semantic HTML. This makes it easier for search engines to crawl and index your pages. Combined with managed hosting on AWS infrastructure with a global CDN, SSL, and automatic image compression (WebP/AVIF), the technical SEO foundation is strong out of the box.
The main SEO limitations are worth knowing. Webflow doesn’t include a real-time content scoring tool like Yoast or Rank Math. The CMS has item limits on lower-tier plans (2,000 items on the CMS plan, 10,000 on Business). And there’s no free built-in analytics, so you’ll either need to connect to Google Analytics, Plausible, or a similar tool, or pay for Webflow Analyze for $9 a month.
Framer SEO for B2B websites
Framer covers the SEO basics effectively. You get meta title and description editing, Open Graph controls, automatic XML sitemaps, and generally good page speed out of the box. For a simple marketing site with a handful of pages, these fundamentals are enough to get started.
Framer does include built-in analytics, providing basic traffic data without extra setup. It is simple, but because of that, it also doesn’t require a cookie banner. And because the platform produces fast-loading pages, your Core Web Vitals scores are typically solid from the start.
Where Framer falls short is in the areas that matter most as a B2B site grows. The CMS offers less granular SEO control compared to Webflow, which becomes a problem when you’re managing a content library with hundreds of pages that each need unique metadata. Schema markup is supported but requires manual setup, with no generator to help create structured data. Redirect management is manual with no bulk import, making site migrations or large-scale URL changes painful. And while Framer has added localization features (€20 per locale, with plan-based limits), Webflow’s localization is more mature and gives you more control over localized URLs and visitor routing.
The code output is also less clean than Webflow’s, with more inline styles. While this doesn’t prevent indexing, it can affect crawl efficiency on larger, more complex sites.
Detailed SEO breakdown
Technical SEO foundations
Technical SEO covers the infrastructure-level factors that affect how search engines crawl, index, and rank your site.
Code quality and crawlability: Webflow generates semantic HTML that’s easy for search engines to parse. Framer’s output includes more inline styles, which adds weight to the page and can slow down Googlebot's processing of your pages. For smaller sites, this difference is negligible. For sites with hundreds of pages, cleaner code helps search engines crawl more of your site within their crawl budget.
Core Web Vitals: Both platforms perform well on page speed metrics like Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) and Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) when built properly. Webflow’s cleaner code gives it a slight edge in most cases, but results vary by site complexity. Neither platform requires the kind of performance tuning that self-hosted solutions demand.
Hosting and server response: Both platforms include managed hosting with CDN distribution, SSL, and fast server response times. You don’t need to make hosting decisions or configure caching on either platform. This is a wash.
XML sitemaps and robots.txt: Both platforms auto-generate XML sitemaps. Webflow gives you more control over sitemap structure and allows more advanced customization of robots.txt. Framer’s sitemap is basic but functional for smaller sites.
On-page SEO controls
On-page SEO covers the elements you control on each page: metadata, URLs, structured data, and other signals that tell search engines what the page is about.
Meta tags and Open Graph: Both platforms let you edit title tags, meta descriptions, and OG images for every page. The interface is native on both platforms. Webflow provides more granular control at the CMS item level, meaning you can set unique metadata for every dynamically generated page. Framer requires more manual work for dynamic pages.
URL structure: Webflow supports clean, hierarchical URL structures with visual folder organization. You can create logical paths, such as/resources/case-studies/client-name, that support topical authority. Framer also allows clean URLs but offers less structural flexibility for organizing content hierarchies.
Schema markup and structured data: Schema is structured data that helps search engines understand your content (for example, identifying an article, FAQ, or organization). Webflow includes a schema markup generator and supports custom JSON-LD via code embeds, making it straightforward to add structured data for common B2B schema types such as Organization, Article, and FAQ. Framer supports schema markup and lets you populate it with variables, but there’s no generator to help create it. Anything beyond basic schema types requires custom code.
Canonical URLs: Webflow provides native canonical URL controls on every page and CMS item. This is important for preventing duplicate content issues, especially on sites with filtered views or paginated content.
Content SEO and CMS capabilities
B2B companies often build large content libraries (blogs, case studies, resource hubs) as a core part of their organic growth strategy. How each platform handles content at scale directly impacts SEO performance.
CMS-level SEO fields: Webflow’s CMS is built for content-heavy sites. Every CMS item has dedicated fields for meta titles, descriptions, OG images, and canonical URLs. Your content team can fine-tune each piece of content individually without touching the design layer. Framer’s CMS is newer and less focused on per-item SEO controls, which becomes a real limitation when you’re publishing regularly and each page targets different search terms.
Dynamic page SEO: Webflow lets you dynamically control metadata, canonical URLs, and schema for every page generated by the CMS. If you publish a new case study, its SEO settings are defined by the CMS structure you’ve set up. Framer offers less control here, which becomes a problem when you’re scaling content production.
Programmatic SEO: Some B2B companies generate hundreds of pages from data sources (comparison pages, location pages, integration directories). Webflow’s CMS supports this with its collection structure, though item limits apply on lower-tier plans. Framer’s CMS can generate dynamic pages, but it lacks the granular SEO controls and the scale of collections that programmatic SEO requires.
Blog management: Webflow handles multi-author blogs with categories, tags, filtering, and sortable archives. Each post gets its own SEO settings. Framer’s CMS works for simpler blog setups but isn’t designed for the same depth of content management.
Redirect management
Redirects are an important but often overlooked SEO function. Every time you change a URL, remove a page, or restructure your site, you need 301 redirects to make sure your visitors don’t land on 404-pages, and to preserve the link equity that page has built over time.
Webflow includes native redirect management with support for bulk imports and pattern-based redirects using wildcards. You can upload a CSV of hundreds of redirects during a site migration, and non-technical team members can manage redirects through the dashboard. There’s no hard limit on the number of redirects.
Framer offers redirect functionality on the Pro plan and above, but redirects must be created manually one by one. There’s no bulk import feature, and the platform doesn’t prompt you to set up a redirect when you delete a page, which makes it easy to accidentally create 404 errors. For a site with a handful of pages, this is manageable. For a B2B site with hundreds of pages going through a restructure or migration, manual redirect management doesn’t scale and increases the risk of missed redirects.
Missing redirects lead to 404 errors, lost rankings, and broken backlinks. The easier your platform makes redirect management, the less likely it is that these issues slip through.
International SEO
Many B2B companies expand internationally as they grow. Serving the right content to the right audience in the right language requires specific technical SEO capabilities.
Hreflang tags: Hreflang is an HTML attribute that specifies the language and region a page targets. Without correct hreflang implementation, Google may show your English page to French users or your US content to German audiences. Both platforms offer localization as a paid add-on. Webflow offers two tiers: Simple (€9/locale, without localized URLs or visitor routing) and Advanced (€29/locale, with localized URLs and automatic visitor routing). Framer charges €20 per locale, with plan-based limits: up to 2 locales on the Basic plan, 10 on the Pro plan, and 20 on the Scale plan.
Localized URL structures: For international SEO, localized URL structures (e.g., yoursite.com/de/, yoursite.com/fr/) are important because they give search engines clear signals about which audience each page targets. This requires Webflow’s Advanced localization tier (€29/locale). Framer supports localized subfolders through its localization add-on at €20/locale, though the feature is newer and less mature than Webflow’s.
Multi-region site management: Both platforms charge per locale, so costs scale with the number of languages you support. The key difference is capability: Webflow’s localization is more established and integrates tightly with its CMS, making it easier to manage localized content at scale. Framer’s localization is newer, and plan-based limits (2 locales on Basic, 10 on Pro, 20 on Scale) can be a constraint for companies with broad international reach.
Which platform fits your situation?
“Organic search is our primary growth channel and we publish content regularly.”
Webflow. The granular CMS-level SEO controls, bulk redirect management, and schema markup generator give your team the tools to execute a content-driven SEO strategy without workarounds.
“We’re early-stage with a simple site and SEO isn’t our top priority yet.”
Framer. The SEO basics are covered, and you can focus on getting a site live quickly. If SEO becomes a priority later, you can migrate to Webflow when the time is right.
“We’re planning a site migration or major URL restructure.”
Webflow. Bulk redirect imports and pattern-based redirects make large-scale URL changes manageable. Doing this manually on Framer with hundreds of URLs is a recipe for missed redirects and lost rankings.
“We’re expanding internationally and need multi-language support.”
Webflow. Both platforms charge per locale, but Webflow’s localization is more mature and integrates tightly with its CMS. For B2B sites that need localized URLs (important for international SEO), Webflow’s Advanced tier (€29/locale) gives you more control than Framer’s add-on (€20/locale). Framer also caps the number of locales based on your plan.
“We have a small site with a few pages and basic SEO needs.”
Either works. Framer’s foundational SEO is adequate for simple sites. The gaps between the platforms only become significant when you’re scaling content, managing complex redirects, or expanding internationally.
“We need our marketing team to manage SEO without developer support.”
Webflow. With a properly structured site, your team can update metadata, publish SEO-ready content, and manage redirects without writing code. Framer’s more limited CMS SEO controls mean more of the SEO work requires technical involvement.
Our recommendation for B2B SEO
For B2B companies where organic search is a growth priority, Webflow is the stronger platform. Its advantages in code quality, CMS-level SEO control, redirect management, and native international SEO support give you a foundation that scales with your business.
Framer is a fair choice for simpler SEO needs: early-stage sites, design-focused projects, or companies where SEO is secondary to other priorities. Its foundational SEO is solid, and if your site stays small and focused, the limitations won’t hold you back.
The gap between these platforms is most noticeable for B2B companies in growth mode. If you’re publishing content regularly, managing a growing library of pages, or expanding into new markets, the SEO friction on Framer compounds over time. Webflow’s built-in tools remove that friction and let your team focus on the strategy rather than the platform.
This comparison covers one aspect of the full platform decision. For a broader view of how Webflow and Framer compare on design, CMS, pricing, and team workflow, see our complete Webflow vs Framer guide.