HTML to Wix Studio: the complete migration guide

No. Wix states that importing a site created outside of Wix isn't supported, so there's no way to hand it your HTML and have a Studio site come out. What your files are good for is everything else: the copy, the images, the alt text, the metadata in your head tags and the redirect rules in your server config are all read straight out of the source and reused. So the design is rebuilt, and almost none of the content has to be retyped.

It's extracted programmatically rather than copied by hand, which is the main reason this migration is faster than it looks. Your markup is parsed into structured data, one CSV per type of page, and imported into Wix CMS collections. Copy, headings, images and alt text all come across. The extraction is then diffed against the live pages before anything is trusted, because parsing errors are silent and a missing paragraph doesn't announce itself.

They become one collection and one layout, and this is where most of the value in the project sits. Twenty hand-maintained service or location pages currently mean twenty files to update when anything changes, which is exactly why they haven't been updated. As a CMS collection, a design change touches all of them at once and adding the twenty-first is filling in a form. Part of the work is spotting where the pattern quietly broke, because the three pages someone edited in 2019 usually reveal a field the collection needs rather than an exception to ignore.

They come with you, and most people don't realise they're worth anything. Your .htaccess or nginx config is the only written record of every URL that ever changed on the site, often added one line at a time over a decade. Those rules get translated into Wix redirects and imported in CSV batches of up to 500. Everything else in that file is a different story: custom headers, caching rules, directory passwords and IP blocks are server configuration with no equivalent, so they're replaced with a Wix feature or dropped deliberately rather than by accident.

This is the move with the least reason to. Wix Studio imposes no path structure on standard pages, so a page at /services/roofing stays at /services/roofing, and collection page paths can be preserved too because Wix's dynamic page prefix is editable. Your existing metadata is sitting in your head tags rather than locked in a platform's settings, so it transfers accurately instead of being reconstructed. Add the redirect history you already own, and the usual sources of loss on a migration mostly don't apply. What still gets done properly: full URL inventory, ranking baseline, mapped redirects for anything that changes, and 30 days of Search Console monitoring after cutover.

No, and that's usually an improvement. A static-site form depends on a server-side script, and those fail quietly: the page still says thank you while the mail never arrives, and businesses have gone months without noticing. Native Wix forms record every submission in the dashboard as well as emailing you, so a delivery problem can't hide. Worth doing before cutover: send a test through the old form and see whether it still reaches anyone, because the answer occasionally reframes the whole project.

Not the process, but it does change what you're holding. A code export from a builder is static markup with the platform's own class names and JavaScript bundle, and typically the dynamic parts never came with it, so forms, any CMS-driven listings and search are already inert. That's worth knowing because those pages may look complete and be doing nothing. If you exported from Webflow specifically, its guide covers what that export does and doesn't contain, and if the original project still exists you'll get far more out of exporting the CMS from there than parsing the flattened HTML.

Almost none of them. Wix Studio imposes no structure on standard pages, so whatever your folder layout produced is reproducible exactly. The one thing to decide deliberately is your file extensions: a static site often serves /about.html, and the Studio equivalent is /about. Where that changes, each old address gets a mapped one-to-one redirect, which is a mechanical job because the pattern is consistent across the whole site.

From €1,750, quoted as a fixed price before anything starts, and two to five weeks from kickoff to launch plus a 30-day monitoring window that runs while you're already live. The number is driven less by page count than by how much of the site follows a pattern. Forty pages that are really four templates is a smaller project than fifteen pages that share nothing. Server-side functionality is the other variable, and anything doing real work gets scoped before the quote rather than discovered halfway through.

Nothing is stopping you, which is exactly the trap on this one. There's no platform gate, no export to request and no plan to upgrade, so a small site really is a weekend. Where it turns is volume and pattern. Copying forty pages by hand takes far longer than parsing them, and hand-copying also rebuilds the original problem: forty separate pages instead of one collection, so nothing about maintaining the site actually improves. The other two things people miss are the .htaccess, which gets left behind with a decade of link equity in it, and the metadata, which is the part that quietly costs organic traffic. Reliable signal: if you can't see the pattern under your own pages, that's the part worth handing over, because a Studio site with an empty CMS is just a prettier version of what you have.