Norcube CMS vs Keystatic — hosted vs self-hosted

• Pick Keystatic if self-hosting is a hard requirement; if you want a CMS you can fork and modify (open source MIT); if your stack is Astro or Next.js (where Keystatic's integration is most polished); if you prefer running zero external services.

• Pick Norcube CMS if you'd rather not operate the editor; if AI scaffolding sounds better than writing the schema by hand; if your stack isn't Astro / Next.js; if you want hosted features (drafts per author, discussions, AI Assist) that need a backend to run.

Both are git-based, both edit markdown frontmatter, both keep your content in your repo with no exit cost. The real question is who runs the editor — you or us — and how much of the schema you want to write yourself.

Hosting model. Keystatic runs inside your app as a route (/keystatic mounted on Astro or Next.js). Norcube CMS is at app.norcube.com and talks to your repo via the Norcube GitHub App. Keystatic = self-hosted; Norcube = hosted.

Setup cost. Keystatic needs the SDK installed, a route added, a config file written. Norcube CMS needs the GitHub App installed and a repo connected from our dashboard — no code in your repo.

Schema authoring. Keystatic's schema is TypeScript (keystatic.config.ts). Norcube's is YAML, AI-scaffolded from your existing content.

Editor features. Both have visual editors. Norcube CMS adds drafts per author, discussions on every field, AI Assist for rewriting copy, per-field git-backed history — features that benefit from a backend service running the show.

Cost. Keystatic is free open-source; you pay your own infra bill (small for most use cases). Norcube CMS is free during beta; paid tiers ship at GA without per-seat fees.