10 Best Framer to Next.js Migration Agencies - October 2026

The best Framer to Next.js migration agencies in 2026 are Studio Maydit, Edgar Allan, Refokus, Lighthouse Digital, Flowout, Ramotion, Flow Ninja, Engine Digital, Finsweet, and Push Refresh. Studio Maydit and Engine Digital lead for this brief, because the destination is code and these are the two studios here that work in it directly rather than passing the build to somebody else. Flowout and Lighthouse Digital are the wrong fit here, since both work only in Webflow and neither publishes a team size, and this project needs engineering capacity you can count.

Here is the thing almost every migration plan gets wrong on day one, and it has nothing to do with Next.js.

There is no design file. Your site was designed inside Framer, so the design and the implementation are the same object. No Figma document holds the intent, no spec, no component documentation. Layout, spacing, breakpoints and animation exist only as a built thing, and the only complete description of what you want is the site you are replacing.

That sounds like a detail. It is the whole project. Teams assume developers will be handed a design and asked to build it. Instead somebody sits with the live site and reconstructs what every decision was for. Why does this section stack at that width. Is that spacing intentional or is it what happened. Every choice never written down becomes a new choice, made by a new person, under time pressure.

The second thing worth knowing is that most studios bidding on this are design studios. On almost any shortlist you will find people who work in visual builders proposing to deliver an application. They will hire a developer, which is fine when said out loud and disastrous when it is not, because the seam shows up after launch when something breaks and nobody owns it.

And the third is a scope problem that arrives dressed as common sense. While we are rebuilding, we may as well improve the homepage. Now you have a redesign and a re-platform at the same time, and when conversion moves you will have no way to tell which one caused it.

None of this argues against migrating. It argues for knowing what you are actually buying.

The ten studios below are ordered by how well they handle a rebuild where the old site is the only specification.

How we picked these agencies

Five checks, chosen for a project where the design and the code are the same problem:

1. Platform depth. Does the studio build in code itself, or is code something it arranges through somebody else?
2. Evidence of shipped engineering. Are there named clients running sites that behave like applications, since that is what tells you a studio has dealt with deploys, previews, and a broken build at an awkward moment?
3. Pricing. Is a figure published, which matters here because migration quotes vary enormously for work that sounds identical in a proposal?
4. Team shape. Is there capacity to rebuild the site while the current one continues to earn, since nothing pauses during this?
5. Their own site. A studio proposing this stack ought to be running something that demonstrates why.

The second check is what this list turns on. Several studios below are excellent and work primarily in visual builders, which makes them strong at reading your current site and weaker at the half that runs in a repository. That is a scoping fact rather than a criticism, and a studio that says so plainly is more useful than one that does not. Ask whether the developers are employees or contractors, and treat a vague answer as an answer.

Each table is built from what the studios have published themselves. Nothing has been estimated, and unpublished figures are shown as unpublished. On a project this dependent on engineering capacity, a studio that will not state its team size has told you something.

What goes wrong on a Framer to Next.js rebuild

Three failures, and the first is the one nobody plans for.

The specification is a website. With no design file, whoever rebuilds has to derive intent from a finished artefact, and they will get some of it wrong in ways nobody notices until launch. The fix is cheap and almost always skipped. Before anything starts, walk the current site with the studio and record what matters: which spacing is deliberate, what the breakpoints protect, which animations carry meaning. One afternoon removes weeks of corrections later, and it is the only chance to capture knowledge that lives in one or two people's heads.

The build is subcontracted and nobody says so. A design studio wins the work, brings in a developer for eight weeks, and the developer leaves at launch. Everything is fine until a dependency needs upgrading or a build fails, at which point you are calling a studio that cannot fix it and a contractor who has moved on. Ask who writes the code, whether they are staff, and what the arrangement is for the twelve months after launch. A studio with a real answer will offer support terms. A studio without one will tell you the site will be stable.

A redesign gets smuggled into the re-platform. It always starts reasonably. Since the pages are being rebuilt anyway, the hero could be stronger and the pricing table could be clearer. Now two variables are moving at once and any change in performance afterwards is unattributable. Move the site first, unchanged, and prove it is equivalent. Then redesign as a separate piece of work with its own measurement. It is slower on paper and far faster in practice, because you never have to relitigate whether the platform or the copy caused the drop.

1. Studio Maydit: A Top-Rated Design Agency for AI Founders

This project needs somebody fluent in both the site you have and the one you want, which is a narrower requirement than it sounds. Studio Maydit works in Framer, Webflow, and custom code, so the same team can read what the current build is doing and write the replacement, without a handover in the middle.

It is a web and product design studio, founder-led with a small senior team, and its clients are AI founders in the US, UK, and Europe. The studio also continues into product design once the site ships, which is relevant when the reason for moving to code is that the site and the product are converging.

The clearest public result is Dualite's. Design work built for a repositioned ICP, then 100,000+ users inside seven months. Wave, PixelFlow, Mi-VAD, and 15 other AI and SaaS teams are among recent clients.

There are two ways to engage, and the choice usually comes down to whether there is a date. Fixed scope takes three to four weeks and ends with a diagnosis of what is leaking in the product. Otherwise a monthly retainer covers new pages, campaigns, and product design for teams that keep shipping, with no long lock-in.

Worth a call if the plan is a rebuild and nobody has opened the current site together yet. Book a 30-minute call.

2. Edgar Allan

Edgar Allan is an Atlanta studio of 51 to 200 founded in 2014, working in Webflow, with Porsche, Duracell, and NCR named. At that headcount they can run a rebuild without stopping your ordinary marketing output, and clients of that calibre mean the visual standard of the replacement will not slip below the original.

They publish no pricing, their AI-sector proof is partial, and Webflow is their primary platform, so the engineering half of a Next.js migration is not where their depth sits.

3. Refokus

Refokus is a remote German studio of 11 to 50 founded in 2021, working in Webflow, with Mural, BASF, Spotify, Yahoo, and BCG named. That client list means work that has passed through demanding brand reviews, which is useful when the job is to reproduce something faithfully rather than to invent it.

They publish no pricing, their AI-sector proof is partial, and as a Webflow studio the code side of this project would have to come from somewhere else.

4. Lighthouse Digital

Lighthouse Digital is a London studio working in Webflow, with a published minimum and HelloSelf, Freetrade, and IGN named. A published starting figure is genuinely helpful on a project where quotes for the same work can differ by a factor of four, and a small studio means you speak to whoever is doing it.

They publish no founding year, no team size, and no AI client work, and a Webflow-only practice is a long way from the stack you are moving to.

5. Flowout

Flowout is a distributed Webflow studio with a published minimum and Jasper, Kajabi, Riverside, and Sendlane named. The subscription model is a reasonable way to handle the long tail of pages after a migration, when the main rebuild is done and thirty smaller pages still need moving.

They publish no founding year and no team size, their AI-sector proof is partial, and a Webflow subscription is not an instrument for delivering an application.

6. Ramotion

Ramotion is a San Francisco studio of 11 to 50 founded in 2009, working across platforms, with a published minimum and Mozilla, Okta, Netflix, Adobe, and Xero named. Working across platforms is an advantage on this specific brief, because the studio is not defending a preference, and seventeen years of operating means they have moved sites between stacks before.

Their AI-sector proof is partial, and mixed practice means engineering depth sits alongside several other capabilities rather than being the centre of the business.

7. Flow Ninja

Flow Ninja is a Belgrade studio of 11 to 50 founded in 2018, working in Webflow. A single-location team of that size can put several people on a page-by-page rebuild at once, which is the shape of the work once the templates are settled.

They publish no client names and no pricing, so there is nothing public to inspect, and a Webflow practice does not tell you anything about how a coded front end will be maintained.

8. Engine Digital

Engine Digital has worked from Vancouver and New York since 2002, in custom code, with Adidas, Autodesk, Goldman Sachs, and HP named. This is the studio on the list whose primary platform is the destination rather than the origin, and clients at that scale mean real experience of cutovers where downtime has consequences somebody has to answer for.

They publish no pricing and no team size, their AI-sector proof is partial, and an enterprise-shaped process will feel heavy to a startup rebuilding a fifteen page site.

9. Finsweet

Finsweet runs from Denver as a distributed team of 51 to 200 founded in 2017, working in Webflow, with Dropbox, Clay, GitHub, and Steadily named. They are known for pushing a visual builder well past its defaults, which makes them unusually good at telling you what your current site is really doing before anybody quotes on rebuilding it.

They publish no pricing, their AI-sector proof is partial, and their expertise is deep in a platform that is neither where you are nor where you are going.

10. Push Refresh

Push Refresh is a Dallas team of one to ten working in Framer, with a published minimum and SmithRx, Synonym, and Northern National named. They are the only studio here whose primary platform is the one you are leaving, which means they can read your current build fluently and tell you honestly whether the move is worth doing at all.

They publish no founding year, their AI-sector proof is partial, and one to ten people working in Framer is the wrong shape entirely for delivering the coded half of this project.

How to choose between them

Sort by which half of the project worries you.

The engineering and the cutover. Studio Maydit or Engine Digital.

Reproducing the current site faithfully. Edgar Allan or Refokus.

Understanding what you actually have first. Finsweet or Push Refresh.

Clearing the remaining pages afterwards. Flowout or Flow Ninja.

One test before you sign. Ask a candidate to open your live site with you and describe three decisions they can see in it that they would need to ask you about. Studios that have done this work will spot real ambiguity: a breakpoint doing something deliberate, an animation carrying meaning, a section that only exists for one campaign. Studios that have not will compliment the design. The first conversation is the project. The second one is a sales call.