#Why Hygraph is a better alternative to Contentstack?
Both Hygraph and Contentstack offer a variety of features for content teams, but Contentstack falls short in being a popular choice for developers.
This is because Contentstack lacks numerous capabilities when it comes to GraphQL and performance. For example, Contentstack offers no GraphQL mutations API or GraphQL management API, and developers have to use the REST alternatives, which also have their limitations (e.g., limit of 10 entries per batch mutation). Contentstack also lacks an integrated API explorer, type safety and auto-generated documentation.
The lack of GraphQL features and content federation, makes Contentstack a popular choice for typical legacy cases quite well, for example, marketing pages. But it is not flexible for more innovative cases especially end-user facing tools requiring user-generated content.
#Challenges you are likely to face with Contentstack
You are likely to face these challenges when using Contentstack:
It only offers a GraphQL API for content delivery. Moreover, it does not offer a high-performance read-only API endpoint with advanced caching solutions.
It does not offer a GraphQL mutations API. Mutations would instead have to be made through the content management REST API. That too, has a limit of up to 10 entries at a time.
It does not allow you to connect to any third-party API.
It does not offer an integrated API explorer, type safety and auto-generated documentation.
It lacks detailed permissions for API tokens.
It lacks depth for certain content management and modeling capabilities. For example, it doesn't offer two-way references, no ability to hide fields from the UI (make them API-only), no scheduling of content as part of a release, etc.