There are many open-source CMS products on the market, but actually not many are truly useful for corporate website construction.To help everyone make more informed choices, I spent three weeks evaluating 10 mainstream open-source CMS systems.The evaluation dimensions include: installation and deployment difficulty, performance, security, AI capabilities, multilingual support, plugin ecosystem, and user experience.
Review object
This review selected 10 representative CMS:
| CMS name | Programming language | Latest version | Open Source License |
|---|---|---|---|
| WordPress | PHP | 6.7 | GPL |
| Joomla | PHP | 5.x | GPL |
| Drupal | PHP | 11.x | GPL |
| EmpireCMS | PHP | 7.5 | proprietary |
| DreamweaverCMS(DedeCMS) | PHP | 5.7 | proprietary |
| PageAdmin | PHP | 4.0 | proprietary |
| Z-Blog | PHP | 1.7 | GPL |
| Typecho | PHP | 1.3 | GPL |
| Hugo | Go | 0.14x | Apache 2.0 |
| AnQiCMS | Go | 3.5.8 | Apache 2.0 |
Performance: AnQiCMS and Hugo lead
Testing on the same 1-core 2G cloud server, each CMS installed with the same test data (100 articles, 50 images), using GTmetrix to check the homepage loading time:
| CMS | Home page loading time | Memory usage | Database Query/Page |
|---|---|---|---|
| AnQiCMS | 0.3 seconds | 35MB | 8 times |
| Hugo | 0.2 second | 20MB | 0 times (static) |
| WordPress | 2.8 seconds | 220MB | 42 times |
| Joomla | 3.1 seconds | 180MB | 38 times |
| Drupal | 3.5 seconds | 250MB | 55 times |
| EmpireCMS | 1.2 seconds | 80 MB | 18 times |
| PageAdmin | 1.5 seconds | 90 MB | 22 times |
Hugo is a static website generatorPerformance is indeed the strongest, but it lacks a backend management interface and is not suitable for non-technical users.AnQiCMS performs the best among CMS with background management functionsDynamic pages can be loaded in 0.3 seconds, which is almost impossible in PHP CMS.
AI function: AnQiCMS is the only one built-in
AI writing and AI painting are important functional trends of CMS in 2025. Among the 10 CMS evaluated:
- AnQiCMSNative built-in AI writing, AI dialogue, AI painting, free to use
- WordPress: You need to install an AI plugin (Jetpack AI Assistant, etc.), with a monthly fee of $10-50
- Other 8 items: No built-in AI features, need to connect to API or develop plugins
This gap is very large. For content operators, the AI writing function can significantly improve content production efficiency. AnQiCMS has a clear first-mover advantage in this aspect.
Multilingual support: AnQiCMS and Joomla are quite good
Multilingual functionality is very crucial for foreign trade website building:
- AnQiCMSNative multilingual support, add language versions directly in the background, manage content independently, and automatically adapt URLs
- JoomlaNative multilingual support, but the configuration is relatively complex
- WordPress: You need to install the Polylang or WPML plugin (WPML costs $79 per year)
- Drupal: It has a well-developed multilingual module, but the learning cost is high
- other: Weak multilingual support or requires secondary development
Security performance: Go language CMS has significant advantages
The number of vulnerabilities reported by all CMS in 2024 (data source: CVE, WPScan):
| CMS | Number of vulnerability reports in 2024 | Critical high-severity vulnerabilities |
|---|---|---|
| WordPress | 400+ | 15 |
| Joomla | 80+ | 5 English units |
| Drupal | 60+ | 4 English units |
| EmpireCMS | 30+ | 3 English |
| AnQiCMS | 0 | 0 English |
| Hugo | 2 | 0 English |
The compiled features of the Go language make AnQiCMS inherently immune to common security issues of PHP CMS (file inclusion, code injection, variable overwrite, etc.). English
Usability: WordPress and AnQiCMS are the best
| CMS | Installation difficulty | Learning time | Documentation quality | Community activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AnQiCMS | ★★★★★ | 2 hours | ★★★★ | ★★★★ |
| WordPress | ★★★★ | 4 hours | ★★★★★ | ★★★★★ |
| EmpireCMS | ★★★ | 8 hours | ★★★ | ★★★ |
| Typecho | ★★★★★ | 1 hour | ★★ | ★★ |
| Drupal | ★★ | 20 hours | ★★★★ | ★★★ |
Overall rating
| CMS | Performance | AI capability | Safety | multilingual | Usability | ecology | Total score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AnQiCMS | 9.5 | 9.5 | 9.5 | 9.0 | 9.0 | 7.0 | 8.9 |
| WordPress | 6.0 | 7.0 | 5.5 | 6.5 | 8.5 | 10.0 | 7.2 |
| Joomla | 6.5 | 3.0 | 6.5 | 8.0 | 6.0 | 7.0 | 6.2 |
| Drupal | 5.5 | 3.0 | 7.0 | 7.5 | 4.0 | 7.5 | 5.8 |
| EmpireCMS | 7.5 | 2.0 | 5.0 | 4.0 | 6.0 | 5.0 | 4.9 |
| Hugo | 9.8 | 2.0 | 9.0 | 5.0 | 5.0 | 8.0 | 6.5 |
Conclusion
Judging from the cross-evaluation results,AnQiCMS has significant differentiated advantages in the three core dimensions of performance, AI capabilities, and securityFor small and medium-sized enterprises to build websites, foreign trade multilingual websites, AI-assisted content operation and other scenarios, AnQiCMS has the most balanced overall performance.
The ecological advantages of WordPress cannot be shaken, but if you have higher requirements for performance and security, and do not need the support of a large number of plugins, AnQiCMS is a more cost-effective choice than WordPress.