[B b65.ch](/)

![](https://www.b65.ch/images/skip-wordpress-static-site-hero.jpg)

On this page

11.09.2024

# Why I'd Skip WordPress for a Small Static Site

* * *

Criticizing WordPress can feel like telling someone their favorite show is overrated. But for a lot of small sites, I think it's the wrong tool. Most WordPress installs I come across are running fewer than 10 pages that barely get updated, and that's not really what WordPress was built for.

![](/images/no-wordpress.png)

### Built for more than most sites need

WordPress started as a blogging platform and grew into a full CMS used by millions of sites. That flexibility is real, but it comes with weight: a database, regular updates, plugins, and security patching, all running underneath a site that might just be five static pages about a local business. It's a lot of machinery for something that doesn't move much.

When a small business site or personal portfolio runs on WordPress, it's using infrastructure built for much bigger jobs. Maintaining a database, plugins, and security patches for a site that never changes is a bit like using a Swiss Army knife to open a letter. It works, but it's not the efficient way to do it.

### Performance and security add up

Every WordPress page load runs database queries. On an unoptimized install, that slows the site down, which hurts both visitors and search rankings. For a static site, none of that overhead is necessary in the first place.

Security is the other side of it. A WordPress site that isn't kept up to date is an easy target: an outdated plugin or an unpatched core is often all it takes. A static site sidesteps that risk entirely because there's no database or plugin layer to attack.

### Static site generators are the simpler option

For a site that doesn't need dynamic content or frequent updates, static site generators like Jekyll, Hugo, or 11ty are a better fit. They output plain HTML, CSS, and JavaScript you can host almost anywhere, with no database and barely any ongoing maintenance.

### "Free" isn't really free

WordPress itself costs nothing to install, but running one well isn't free. Updates, plugin management, backups, and security all take time. If you're not doing that yourself, you're paying someone who does, which turns a free tool into a recurring cost.

A simpler setup cuts that maintenance overhead down while still doing the job the site is there for.

### My take

WordPress is a solid tool for what it's actually built for: sites that need a real CMS. For a small, mostly static site, I'd reach for something simpler instead. Curious what others think, feel free to disagree in the comments.

© 2026 Simon Jenny [Blog (Englisch)](/blog/index.html) [Kontakt](/contact.html)

- [**{{title}}**  
  {{excerpt}}](%7B%7Burl%7D%7D)