Framer appears in the portfolio websites of studios including Bleed, Goods, BAS ID, Shuka and IMCOLLECTIVE. Those examples make it a useful part of the D1S1 technology directory: a way to find actual studio websites built with a tool you are considering.
Reviewed September 4, 2026. The original article claimed that studios were switching to Framer, that its adoption was growing consistently, and that its users were younger or smaller than Webflow studios. Our scan data does not establish those claims. This revision uses the March 10, 2026 export and separates recorded detections from interpretation.
What the snapshot shows
In an export of 400 studio websites, Framer appeared on 20. All 20 had Framer-specific HTML attributes in the saved detection evidence. Webflow appeared on 49, supported by its distinctive page attributes.
These figures describe studios' own sites in a curated directory. They do not measure client-project usage, industry market share, studio size or the quality of the finished websites. Technologies may overlap on a site.
The technology directory uses the latest stored detections, so its counts can differ from this historical snapshot. A higher count today could reflect new studios entering the directory, newly completed scans or actual adoption. Without repeated observations of the same studios, we cannot separate those explanations.
Use the examples to answer a build question
Start with the work your portfolio needs to do. Does your team need to publish case studies frequently? How much content must fit into a common structure? Which interactions are essential to presenting the work?
Then inspect several Framer studio websites for those specific requirements. Check their case-study structure, mobile layouts, navigation and loading behaviour. A platform label helps you find references; the finished site is where you assess the execution. Technology-filtered studio lists require Pro.
The scan does not show how often a studio updates its site, who built it or how long a redesign took. Those questions need editorial records or an interview with the team.
Framer and Webflow: compare requirements
The earlier article drew a sharp line between Framer for visual portfolios and Webflow for sites with a CMS. That was misleading: Framer provides CMS features and supports custom JavaScript, CSS and third-party scripts.
A useful comparison starts with your requirements: content structure, editing workflow, integrations, accessibility, maintenance and ownership. Verify each requirement in the current product and test a representative page before committing to a rebuild. The studio counts alone cannot choose a platform for you.
Our data does show one useful combination: 19 of the 49 Webflow sites also had GSAP detections. It is a reminder to research the full stack of a reference site. A visual builder can coexist with additional animation code.
What would establish a migration trend?
To say studios are switching to Framer, we would need a dated earlier scan and a dated later scan of each studio, with reliable platform evidence in both. A studio newly added to D1S1 should not be counted as a migration.
To explain why a team switched, we would need its account of the decision. To compare the size or services of Framer and Webflow studios, we would need those attributes measured consistently across both groups.
For now, the defensible finding is narrower and still useful: Framer is represented among the portfolio sites in this sample, with specific examples to explore. Read the full 400-studio analysis for the platform combinations and detection limits behind the numbers.
