The CMS Quality Gap: How WordPress, Drupal, and Shopify Compare on SEO, EEAT, and Accessibility

Does your CMS choice affect website quality? We took 705,554 domains running 10 different CMS and web platforms — from WordPress's 454,000-site empire to Hugo's 8,400-site niche — and cross-referenced each one against four quality dimensions: SEO, E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness), WCAG accessibility, and readability. The result is the largest CMS quality comparison ever published.

The short answer: your CMS choice matters — but not where you'd expect.

The Numbers

We analyzed domains detected running these 10 platforms, drawn from LLMSE's classification database of 1.4 million URLs:

Platform Type Domains
WordPress CMS 454,493
Medium Blogging Platform 141,330
Drupal CMS 25,216
Jekyll Static Generator 15,886
Next.js JS Framework 15,128
Shopify E-commerce 13,877
Squarespace Website Builder 11,642
Webflow Website Builder 9,854
Astro Static Generator 9,699
Hugo Static Generator 8,429

Each domain was checked against four quality analyzers, each scoring 0-100 and assigning a letter grade (A through F). Not every domain has been analyzed on every dimension — SEO coverage is deepest (369K graded domains across these platforms), while WCAG and Readability coverage is still growing (24K and 27K respectively). Sample sizes are noted where they affect interpretation.

Summary: Passing Rates Across All Four Dimensions

The table below shows the percentage of each platform's graded domains scoring A, B, or C (70+) — a "passing" grade:

CMS Domains SEO EEAT WCAG Readability
WordPress 454,493 2.9% 70.8% 52.0% 71.5%
Medium 141,330 2.9% 63.8% 40.1% 75.4%
Drupal 25,216 3.6% 71.1% 55.6% 62.5%
Jekyll 15,886 4.5% 60.5% 69.1%* 56.8%*
Next.js 15,128 3.0% 35.4% 65.5% 50.7%
Shopify 13,877 4.0% 58.7% 36.5%* 75.4%*
Squarespace 11,642 2.6% 37.9% 74.0% 73.6%
Webflow 9,854 1.2% 87.4% 56.2%* 74.8%*
Astro 9,699 7.0% 68.3% 45.2% 63.5%
Hugo 8,429 3.9% 62.0% 56.9%* 65.9%*

*Small graded sample (n < 500). Interpret with caution.

Three patterns jump out immediately:

  1. SEO is a universal failure. The best platform — Astro at 7.0% — still means 93% of its sites fail. No CMS saves you from bad SEO.
  2. EEAT is where CMS choice matters most. The gap between Webflow (87.4%) and Next.js (35.4%) is 52 percentage points — the widest swing in any dimension.
  3. No platform leads in every category. Webflow dominates EEAT but has the worst SEO. Squarespace leads WCAG but trails on EEAT. Every platform has blind spots.

SEO by CMS

CMS Graded A B C D F Pass Rate
WordPress 234,244 0.1% 0.7% 2.1% 3.8% 93.2% 2.9%
Medium 83,605 0.0% 0.6% 2.3% 5.6% 91.5% 2.9%
Drupal 5,100 0.1% 0.6% 2.9% 6.8% 89.5% 3.6%
Jekyll 15,015 0.0% 0.4% 4.1% 14.1% 81.4% 4.5%
Next.js 7,651 0.1% 0.7% 2.2% 4.9% 92.2% 3.0%
Shopify 1,025 0.3% 1.1% 2.6% 5.0% 91.0% 4.0%
Squarespace 6,811 0.0% 0.2% 2.4% 5.4% 92.0% 2.6%
Webflow 3,882 0.0% 0.2% 1.0% 3.8% 95.0% 1.2%
Astro 5,572 0.1% 1.6% 5.3% 7.0% 86.0% 7.0%
Hugo 5,942 0.0% 0.6% 3.2% 10.8% 85.3% 3.9%

Astro leads SEO at 7.0% — still dismal, but double the rate of most platforms. Static site generators as a group (Astro, Hugo, Jekyll) occupy the top three spots. The reason: static generators produce clean, predictable HTML without the bloat of dynamic CMS platforms. No plugin conflicts, no theme overhead, no JavaScript-rendered content that crawlers miss.

Webflow is dead last at 1.2%. This is surprising for a platform marketed to designers who care about web standards. The likely explanation: Webflow sites are heavily visual, with complex CSS animations, custom interactions, and image-heavy layouts that accumulate SEO deductions across image optimization, performance, and content depth checks.

WordPress and Medium tie at 2.9% despite being fundamentally different platforms. WordPress's plugin ecosystem should give it an SEO advantage (Yoast alone has 10+ million installs), but the sheer diversity of WordPress sites — from well-maintained business sites to abandoned blogs — averages out to the web's baseline.

Jekyll's 14.1% D-grade rate is notably high. Jekyll sites cluster in the D range rather than the F range, suggesting they get many things right (clean HTML, proper meta tags from templates) but miss enough checks (image optimization, structured data, social tags) to stay below passing.

EEAT by CMS

CMS Graded A B C D F Pass Rate
Webflow 1,641 23.0% 28.0% 36.4% 12.2% 0.4% 87.4%
WordPress 167,107 3.6% 49.0% 18.2% 23.6% 5.5% 70.8%
Drupal 1,519 12.5% 21.9% 36.7% 22.9% 6.0% 71.1%
Astro 3,597 4.6% 18.7% 45.0% 26.2% 5.6% 68.3%
Medium 52,463 5.8% 30.4% 27.6% 32.9% 3.3% 63.8%
Hugo 5,120 1.4% 13.6% 46.9% 31.4% 6.6% 62.0%
Jekyll 14,004 0.3% 8.3% 51.9% 36.4% 3.1% 60.5%
Shopify 305 15.1% 24.9% 18.7% 38.4% 3.0% 58.7%
Squarespace 5,551 1.5% 8.8% 27.6% 51.1% 11.0% 37.9%
Next.js 5,219 2.3% 9.4% 23.7% 63.2% 1.3% 35.4%

EEAT is where platform choice creates the largest quality gap.

Webflow dominates at 87.4%, with 23% of its sites scoring A — the highest A-rate of any platform on any dimension. Webflow sites tend to be marketing sites and agency portfolios built by design-conscious teams. These sites naturally include the signals EEAT scoring rewards: about pages with team bios, contact information, testimonials, professional credentials, and clear organizational identity.

WordPress (70.8%) and Drupal (71.1%) are neck-and-neck, both benefiting from mature ecosystems that encourage trust-building content patterns. WordPress's massive B-grade concentration (49.0%) reflects its plugin ecosystem — themes and plugins that automatically add author bios, organization schema, and contact pages.

Next.js scores worst at 35.4%, with a striking 63.2% clustering in D grade. Next.js sites are predominantly developer-built applications — SaaS dashboards, documentation sites, developer tools — that prioritize functionality over trust signals. They often lack the "about us" pages, author credentials, and organizational schema that EEAT scoring measures.

Squarespace (37.9%) underperforms despite being a visual website builder like Webflow. The difference: Squarespace templates tend toward minimalist design with less text content, while Webflow's more customizable approach lets agencies build content-rich marketing sites. Squarespace also has the highest F-rate (11.0%) of any platform on EEAT.

WCAG Accessibility by CMS

CMS Graded A B C D F Pass Rate
Squarespace 438 35.2% 25.3% 13.5% 6.6% 19.4% 74.0%
Jekyll 68 38.2% 19.1% 11.8% 11.8% 19.1% 69.1%*
Next.js 258 30.6% 15.9% 19.0% 17.8% 16.7% 65.5%
Hugo 144 33.3% 14.6% 9.0% 20.1% 22.9% 56.9%*
Webflow 105 8.6% 21.0% 26.7% 21.9% 21.9% 56.2%*
Drupal 356 22.5% 17.7% 15.4% 17.7% 26.7% 55.6%
WordPress 17,356 16.6% 19.7% 15.7% 17.3% 30.7% 52.0%
Astro 489 13.7% 14.9% 16.6% 14.3% 40.5% 45.2%
Medium 4,827 16.2% 8.8% 15.1% 12.9% 47.0% 40.1%
Shopify 52 9.6% 11.5% 15.4% 17.3% 46.2% 36.5%*

*Small sample (n < 500). Interpret with caution.

Squarespace leads accessibility at 74.0%, with the highest A-rate (35.2%) among platforms with meaningful sample sizes. Squarespace's opinionated templates enforce consistent HTML structure, proper heading hierarchy, ARIA labels, and form labeling — the exact checks WCAG scoring measures. When a platform controls the HTML output, accessibility improves by default.

Jekyll and Next.js follow at 69.1% and 65.5% — an interesting pairing. Jekyll's static HTML is naturally clean and semantic. Next.js benefits from React's accessibility-aware component ecosystem and the framework's server-side rendering, which ensures content is available without JavaScript.

Medium trails at 40.1% with 47.0% scoring F. Despite Medium's clean reading experience, the platform's HTML has accessibility gaps — particularly around image handling, form labeling, and navigation patterns that our analyzer flags.

WordPress at 52.0% sits in the middle, reflecting the ecosystem's diversity. WordPress's accessibility depends entirely on the theme: a well-built theme produces accessible HTML; a cheap ThemeForest template may not. The 30.7% F-rate reflects the long tail of poorly coded themes.

Readability by CMS

CMS Graded A B C D F Pass Rate
Medium 5,291 23.7% 14.5% 37.1% 13.4% 11.2% 75.4%
Shopify 57 42.1% 10.5% 22.8% 17.5% 7.0% 75.4%*
Webflow 123 19.5% 18.7% 36.6% 17.9% 7.3% 74.8%*
Squarespace 497 24.5% 17.5% 31.6% 13.5% 12.9% 73.6%
WordPress 19,690 18.9% 16.3% 36.2% 18.6% 9.9% 71.5%
Hugo 164 23.8% 19.5% 22.6% 17.7% 16.5% 65.9%*
Astro 539 14.7% 13.9% 34.9% 20.2% 16.3% 63.5%
Drupal 397 14.4% 15.9% 32.2% 23.9% 13.6% 62.5%
Jekyll 74 13.5% 12.2% 31.1% 23.0% 20.3% 56.8%*
Next.js 280 21.1% 7.9% 21.8% 10.7% 38.6% 50.7%

*Small sample (n < 500). Interpret with caution.

Medium leads readability at 75.4% — no surprise for a platform purpose-built for writing. Medium's editor encourages short paragraphs, clean formatting, and conversational prose. The platform's design constraints naturally produce content that scores well on Flesch Reading Ease.

Shopify ties Medium at 75.4%, though with only 57 graded domains. Shopify's product descriptions and marketing copy tend toward simple, direct language — write to sell, not to impress.

Webflow (74.8%) and Squarespace (73.6%) cluster together. Both are visual builders used for marketing sites where clear, persuasive copy is the default writing style.

Next.js is last at 50.7%, with 38.6% scoring F — the highest failure rate of any platform. Next.js sites are disproportionately developer documentation, technical blogs, and SaaS landing pages. Technical writing uses longer sentences, jargon, and complex sentence structures that lower Flesch Reading Ease scores.

Key Findings

1. No CMS fixes SEO — it's a universal failure

The SEO column is the most striking: every platform falls between 1.2% and 7.0% passing. Your CMS choice accounts for at most a 6-percentage-point difference in SEO outcomes. The other 93%+ of the variance comes from how you use the platform — content quality, technical implementation, image optimization, structured data, and the dozens of other factors our 80+ SEO checks measure.

2. EEAT is the quality dimension most affected by CMS choice

The 52-point gap between Webflow (87.4%) and Next.js (35.4%) is enormous. Platform choice doesn't just correlate with EEAT scores — it likely causes them. Platforms designed for marketing sites (Webflow, WordPress) naturally produce pages with trust signals. Platforms designed for applications (Next.js) naturally produce pages without them.

3. Opinionated platforms produce better accessibility

Squarespace (74.0%) and Jekyll (69.1%) — platforms that tightly control HTML output — lead accessibility. WordPress (52.0%) and Astro (45.2%) — platforms that give developers more freedom — trail. The implication: accessibility improves when the platform enforces it, not when developers choose it.

4. Content platforms produce more readable text

Medium (75.4%), Shopify (75.4%), and the website builders (Webflow, Squarespace) cluster at the top for readability. Developer-oriented platforms (Next.js, Jekyll) sit at the bottom. This isn't a platform issue — it's an audience issue. Sites built for general consumers write simply. Sites built for developers write technically.

5. WordPress is the compromise platform

WordPress sits in the middle of every dimension: 2.9% SEO, 70.8% EEAT, 52.0% WCAG, 71.5% Readability. It's never the best, never the worst. With 454,000 domains, WordPress is too diverse to have a personality — it is the average of the web.

Methodology

This analysis cross-referenced CMS/application detection data with quality grade indices in LLMSE's classification database, covering 705,554 domains across 10 platforms as of February 25, 2026.

CMS detection uses HTML fingerprinting — generator meta tags, script sources, CSS patterns, and other platform-specific signatures in the homepage HTML response. Quality grades were generated by LLMSE's analyzers: SEO (80+ on-page checks), EEAT (experience, expertise, authoritativeness, trustworthiness signals), WCAG (15 automated WCAG 2.1 Level A checks), and Readability (Flesch Reading Ease scoring).

Cross-referencing was performed using Redis sorted set intersections (ZINTERSTORE) between CMS indices (app-{Platform}) and grade indices ({dimension}-{A-F}). Not all classified domains have been analyzed on every quality dimension — SEO has the deepest coverage (369K graded domains across these platforms), followed by EEAT (257K), Readability (27K), and WCAG (24K). Platforms with fewer than 500 graded domains on a given dimension are marked with an asterisk.

Limitations: Quality scores reflect the initial HTML response, not the fully rendered page. CMS detection is limited to platforms with identifiable HTML fingerprints — sites using heavily customized themes or headless architectures may not be detected. Grade distributions reflect the sites that have been analyzed, which may not be perfectly representative of each platform's full population.

Explore the Data

Browse CMS and technology distributions on LLMSE's technology index. Check quality grades for any domain using our comprehensive audit. Filter sites by platform using app: filters in advanced search — for example, app:WordPress or app:Astro. The REST API provides programmatic access to all classification and quality data.


This analysis was conducted using LLMSE, which has classified over 1.4 million websites across SEO, EEAT, WCAG accessibility, readability, and GARM brand safety dimensions. All data reflects the database as of February 2026. To analyze your own site, visit llmse.ai/classify.