Choosing a tech stack is one of the most important technical decisions you’ll make.

Two main approaches have emerged: monolithic (coupled) systems and composable (decoupled) architectures. Each offers distinct benefits, and selecting between them shapes how your organization delivers digital experiences to its customers and achieves its digital transformation goals.

But which is the best tech stack for your business? Let’s explore.

The Evolution of Website Tech Stacks

WordPress pioneered the traditional monolithic approach two decades ago. It combined frontend and backend systems while building native integrations within its stack.

Some technologists found WordPress bloated with features they didn’t need and sought more lightweight solutions. Over time, a new philosophy emerged, focused on simplicity and modularity.

This shift inspired architectures like Jamstack, which emphasizes decoupled services and static generation. Instead of downloading comprehensive platforms filled with unused features — like purchasing a phone preloaded with unwanted apps — developers could start with basic content management and add capabilities only when needed.

The Business Impact of Tech Stack Decisions

Harvard Business Review recently highlighted compelling data about digital transformation outcomes.

While 89% of large companies have digital initiatives underway, they’ve captured only 31% of expected revenue lift and 25% of expected cost savings from these efforts. Organizations classified as digital leaders achieved 8.1% annual shareholder returns between 2018–2022, compared to 4.9% for digital laggards.

These leaders also demonstrated stronger metrics:

• 0.5% annual growth in customer base (vs. zero growth for laggards)
• 0.8% annual growth in retail revenues (vs. -1.4% decline for laggards)
• 1.3% annual growth in operating expenses (vs. 2.3% for laggards)

IDC’s research indicates that only 38% of organizations have reached high digital transformation maturity, with just 13% claiming full transformation. The majority remain focused on short-term or functional goals rather than strategic transformation.

This suggests that choosing between monolithic and composable architectures isn’t just a technical decision. It’s a strategic choice that impacts business performance.

Success requires aligning technology architecture with business strategy. Organizations that thoroughly transform their technology stack achieve significant improvements.

For example, one U.S. bank reduced their loan approval process from 28 to 7 days while increasing originations by 35% through comprehensive digital transformation of their lending operations.

Why Companies Face This Choice

Many organizations reach the “composable or monolithic?” fork in the road during their digital transformation initiatives. They want to rectify:

• Slow, manual workflows
• Limited personalization capabilities
• Difficulty delivering content across channels
• Inefficient content management processes

The core question becomes: How can we efficiently deliver digital content to our website, mobile app, sales team, and other channels?

Two distinct paths present themselves:

The Monolithic Path

Platforms like Adobe Experience Manager offer comprehensive, integrated tools. Everything works together out of the box — content management, login systems, payment processing, and front-end development.

You don’t need to worry about building an ecosystem of tools on your own. You get everything in one package.

(It’s worth noting that Adobe Experience Manager is not just monolithic. It can also support headless/composable approaches, allowing your company to switch strategies without searching for new tools.)

Strengths of Monolithic Systems

Speed leads the advantages of monolithic systems.

Many decisions come pre-made, accelerating your time to market. Since you spend less time configuring individual components, you enjoy lower initial development costs.

Built-in features and native integrations are another key benefit. For instance, Adobe Experience Manager includes digital asset management within its content management system, requiring no additional setup. You don’t need to figure out separate solutions for managing media assets and content.

Security and compliance stand out for regulated industries. These platforms typically offer built-in solutions for financial regulations and HIPAA compliance, reducing implementation complexity and providing peace of mind for organizations in sensitive sectors.

Composable architectures can be just as secure as monolithic ones but require more intentional security planning.

The Composable Path

This approach leverages the vast MarTech landscape, letting you select individual best-of-breed tools and connect them through APIs.

For instance, you might choose Contentful for content management, Auth0 for authentication, Next.js for frontend development, Stripe for payments, etc.

Benefits of Composable Architecture

Composable systems are customizable and scalable. When you need to manage fluctuating website traffic or growing user numbers, having granular control over each system component is invaluable.

This architecture is future-proofed. If one tool no longer meets your needs, you can replace it without disrupting your entire tech stack.

For example, if you need to switch payment processors, you can do so with minimal impact on other systems. While this transition requires some configuration and management, it’s easier than changing components in a monolithic system.

The ability to choose best-of-breed solutions for each function gives you maximum control. You select exactly the right tool for each job rather than accepting a one-size-fits-all solution that might excel in some areas but fall short in others.

Real-World Applications

Monolithic systems are simple but rigid (like an iPhone), while composable systems are complex but flexible (like a custom gaming PC). Neither is inherently better than the other, but each serves different needs.

Different industries often lean toward different solutions. For instance, composable architectures work well in the retail industry. Consider a major retailer that needs to:

• Maintain a commerce layer
• Manage content across platforms
• Run a custom frontend
• Support native mobile apps
• Display content on Times Square billboards
• Scale globally

They might use BigCommerce as their commerce engine, Contentful for content management, and React for their front end. This composable approach allows them to deliver content across many channels while maintaining global scalability.

Meanwhile, monolithic systems are often a better fit for the healthcare industry. Healthcare organizations typically focus on:

• Website experiences
• Patient portal integration
• Billing system connections
• Regulatory compliance
• Clear, simple workflows

They need clean workflows and compliance features more than extensive customization. Most of their external integrations link to other properties anyway, making a monolithic stack a sound choice for their specific market and limited digital footprint.

Questions to Guide Your Decision

To determine the best approach for your organization, consider these key dimensions:

• Strategic Focus
  • Time-to-market vs. customization needs
  • Single market vs. global reach requirements
  • Vendor independence importance
• Technical Reality
  • Your team’s development capabilities
  • Integration requirements
  • Available resources for maintenance
• Growth Trajectory
  • Expected content volume and frequency
  • Channel expansion plans
  • Scale and performance needs

For example, a monolithic system is likely best if you need rapid deployment with standard features and have limited technical resources. If you’re managing multiple channels with unique requirements and have strong technical capabilities, consider composable.

Remember: The right choice aligns with both your current capabilities and future business goals. The best architecture is one your team can effectively implement and maintain.

The Bottom Line

A monolithic system might be your best tech stack if you:

• Need a straightforward website with standard features
• Want faster implementation
• Have limited technical resources
• Prioritize simplicity over customization
• Focus on a specific market
• Need strong out-of-the-box compliance features

A composable system might be your best tech stack if you:

• Deliver content across multiple channels
• Need extensive customization options
• Want maximum scalability
• Plan to expand your digital presence significantly
• Require global reach
• Value vendor independence

The right choice depends on your organization’s needs, resources, and goals. Building digital products that deliver real business value requires more than just technical knowledge – it requires strategic insight into how technology choices shape business outcomes. The data is clear: organizations that align their tech stack decisions with business strategy significantly outperform their peers, achieving higher revenue growth, better customer retention, and lower operating costs.

At Method, we bring deep expertise in both monolithic and composable architectures, having guided organizations through successful implementations of both approaches. Our framework-driven approach ensures technology decisions support your specific business goals.

We distinguish ourselves through:

• Proven experience reducing time-to-market
• Deep technical expertise in modern development practices
• Strategic understanding of digital product evolution
• Focus on measurable business outcomes, not just technical deliverables

The choice between monolithic, composable, or hybrid architectures isn’t just about technology – it’s about creating a foundation for your organization’s digital future. Our team can help you evaluate your needs, assess your readiness, and implement the right solution for your business.

Ready to identify and implement the best tech stack for your needs? Reach out today.