The DXP Catalyst Update - July 18, 2025

INTRO
Welcome to This Week’s DXP Catalyst Update

In this week’s DXP Catalyst Update, we’re exploring a question that’s come up in several recent conversations: are legacy monolithic digital experience platforms (DXPs) still delivering full value, or are they just functioning as content management systems (CMS)?

As we wrap up the week and continue our CMS vendor analysis, this topic has been top of mind. Many organizations are still running on platforms purchased years ago, often with bundled features like personalization, analytics, and email marketing. But based on what we’ve seen historically, those capabilities are rarely used. That disconnect raises important questions about value, redundancy, and whether it’s time to rethink the stack.

LEADERSHIP GUIDANCE

Is Your DXP Delivering Real Value or Just Managing Content?

Legacy all-in-one DXPs promised to centralize digital experience delivery by bundling CMS, personalization, analytics, email, and campaign tools into a single platform. That vision made sense for many organizations looking to consolidate their stack and simplify operations.

But in practice, the full breadth of these platforms often goes unused. Many teams rely almost exclusively on the CMS, while turning to third-party tools for everything else. As a result, companies may be paying a premium for bundled capabilities that are sitting idle. With budget pressure mounting and vendor roadmaps shifting toward modular offerings, now is a good time to reassess whether your platform is truly delivering value across the stack or simply managing content.

1. The Suite was the Sell, but the CMS is what Stuck

Monolithic DXPs like Sitecore XP, and earlier versions of Adobe Experience Manager and Optimizely (then EpiServer) were often selected for their breadth. They offered CMS at the core, surrounded by complementary tools: personalization engines, built-in analytics, testing capabilities, and sometimes email marketing.

But in real-world use, many enterprise teams ended up leaning almost exclusively on the CMS. Personalization may have been too complex to operationalize. The analytics module lacked depth compared to dedicated tools. The email engine felt limited next to best-in-class providers.

In many cases, the DXP was sold as a vision for unified orchestration but implemented as a CMS with future potential. Those “phase two” features never came.

2. The Hidden Cost of Unused Capabilities

Sticking with just the CMS doesn’t come cheap. Even cloud-hosted DXPs are priced to reflect the full suite. That means organizations are often paying for infrastructure and features they aren’t using, and sometimes duplicating functionality with other tools.

You might be leveraging an external marketing automation platform instead of the DXP’s native email feature. Or using a separate personalization engine rather than the built-in module. In both cases, you’re incurring redundancy in your tech stack while still footing the bill for bundled platform components.

Some vendors allowed you to descope capabilities, but many do not. And even in flexible contracts, usage-based pricing can be unclear. At scale, this becomes a material cost issue, especially when third-party systems are necessary to meet business needs that the DXP was supposed to handle.

3. Operational Complexity Can Stall Adoption

Why don’t teams activate the full platform? In many cases, it’s not about the tools themselves but about organizational readiness.

Personalization, for example, requires a governance model, real-time data, a test-and-learn culture, and a high degree of integration. The DXP may include a personalization engine, but unless marketing and IT are aligned around use cases and data flow, it will sit unused.

Similarly, analytics modules may exist within the DXP, but without strong tagging strategies, data integration, and stakeholder buy-in, they fall short compared to external platforms already embedded in the organization.

The result is a growing gap between what was bought and what is actually delivering value.

4. What the Shift to Composable Reveals

In response to this shift, many vendors have adjusted their positioning. This has been supported by significant investments in acquisitions and major re-architecture of their platforms. Optimizely now promotes a composable suite with modular packaging and greater interoperability. Other vendors continue to lead with an all-in-one message while quietly expanding API access and headless capabilities.

This evolution reflects increasing demand for architectural flexibility. Rather than relying on a single platform to handle everything, more enterprises are building ecosystems composed of interchangeable parts. Content may be managed in one system, analytics handled elsewhere, and orchestration managed through middleware.

Monolithic DXPs still have a role, but that role is evolving. If you’re not using the platform’s integrated capabilities, you may be paying for assumptions that no longer align with how your organization actually operates.

5. When is it Time to Reassess?

There’s no universal answer, but several signals may indicate that it’s time to reevaluate your DXP investment:

• You’re using less than half of your DXP’s feature set

• Third-party tools have replaced key modules, but licensing costs remain high

• Your current architecture cannot adapt quickly to needs

• You’re approaching renewal with significant annual spend on unused capabilities

• Your platform is nearing end-of-life, and the required upgrade path is costly or complex

In some cases, the decision is no longer optional. For example, older versions of platforms like Sitecore XP are being phased out, and the cost and effort required to upgrade may prompt a broader conversation about replatforming. At that point, comparing the risks and costs of maintaining the current system against a move toward a more composable or best-of-breed model becomes a necessary exercise.

Final Thoughts

Legacy DXPs can still be powerful assets, but only if they deliver value across the full digital experience stack, not just content publishing. As platforms evolve and budgets face closer scrutiny, organizations should take a hard look at what they’re actually using and whether the investment aligns with the return.

This isn’t just about cutting costs. It’s about making sure your tools support the way your teams work and the experiences your audiences expect. Whether that means scaling down your current platform, reactivating underused features, or preparing for a future replatform, now is the time to ensure your DXP is working for you.