Next.js, built by people who pick the rendering on purpose.

For a new build, the App Router. It is where the framework is actively developed, and React Server Components let most of a page ship with no client-side JavaScript at all, which is the single largest performance difference between a fast Next.js site and a slow one. The Pages Router still works and is still supported, so an existing Pages Router app is not a problem and does not need rewriting to be worked on. The two can also run side by side in the same application, which is how we usually migrate a large app: route by route, with nothing taken offline.

Most marketing sites, documentation, and content-driven products should be fully static — it is faster, cheaper to host, and cannot break at request time. Server rendering earns its place when a page shows per-user data, when content must be correct the instant it changes, or when the page depends on the request itself. Next.js lets this be decided per route rather than per project, so a single application can serve a static marketing page and a server-rendered dashboard from the same codebase. We pick per route and tell you which routes are which, because that decision drives your hosting bill.

Yes, and it is one of the more common reasons people come to us. The work is in three parts: moving the content into a source you can still edit, rebuilding the templates as Next.js routes, and mapping every existing URL to its new one so the rankings you already have survive the move. That last part is where most migrations quietly lose traffic, so redirects are part of the scope rather than a follow-up task. You can keep WordPress purely as the editing interface if your team is used to it.

Usually yes, but the framework is not what makes it fast — the decisions inside it are. A Next.js site built carelessly, shipping a large client bundle and fetching data in the browser, can be slower than a well-built WordPress site. The gains come from rendering on the server, sending little or no JavaScript for pages that do not need it, and controlling images and fonts. We treat Core Web Vitals as a budget agreed before the build rather than something measured afterwards, which is the only reliable way to hit them.

No. Vercel builds Next.js and their hosting is genuinely good, but it is not a requirement and we do not push it. A statically exported Next.js site runs on any static host — Firebase Hosting, Cloudflare Pages, S3, or plain nginx. An application needing server rendering runs anywhere Node runs, including a container on your own cloud account. This site is itself a static Next.js export on Firebase Hosting. We deploy to whichever account is yours, and you keep the credentials.

Yes. We start by reading the code and the deployment setup, then tell you honestly whether it is worth extending or genuinely needs replacing — those are different answers and the second one is rarer than agencies tend to claim. Common work here is upgrading across major versions, moving from the Pages Router to the App Router incrementally, cutting bundle size, and fixing the rendering choices that are causing slow pages or a large hosting bill.