Fig - Marketing OS

For non-technical founders who want to be in charge of marketing, website builders like Webflow, Go High Level, Click Funnels, and others seem like the right choice, but here's what they're not telling you.

There are five main ways that these traditional builders hurt your conversions compared to custom code and the infrastructure Fig uses.

1. Performance

It's no secret that a fast page creates a much better experience for users than one that loads slowly. What causes the problem for the traditional builders, is the structure they use. It causes their landing pages to be clunky.

This extra software bloat and multi-purpose code, including unused tags and styling, weighs down the browsers, leading to a low quality customer experience.

These slower Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) and Time To Interactives (TTI) increase your bounce rate and cause a reduction in conversions by five and sometimes 10 percent.

Fig’s infrastructure is engineered to create the closest experience to custom code as possible.

2. Limited Experimentation

Site builders tend to be restrictive because it’s easier to manage. When 80% of the users can build what they want with more basic tools, is it important to have the extra functionality?

Before we built Fig, we had an agency. As we built our pages, we were in the 10% that couldn’t make our final tweaks or adjustments the way we wanted so we moved to custom code. If you’re technical this is a viable option but it still leaves all the tools disconnected. Even when we were running paid traffic through our custom coded sites we couldn’t show different traffic separate versions of the landing page easily. This ability to create and have control over the specifics is why we built Fig.

3. Template Bias

It makes sense that these builders would have templates because it makes getting started on their platform that much easier. You may have noticed how ClickFunnels and GHL pages feel the same. That’s because one of the things that make ClickFunnels so popular was all of the community sourced templates.

That may have worked in the past, but these days, the style of page plays a big role in my buying decisions and I’m sure it’s the same for your buyers as well.

At our launch (as of April 2026) we don’t have templates because we don’t want Fig to feel like “a tool all marketers use.” We want it to feel like the tool YOU use so your personal touch shines through.

4. Content Structure Limitations

Most builders claim to be SEO friendly, and they have the basic components available, but the extra bloat that comes with their software, causes the pages to be more difficult to crawl.

Marketers can get a substantial amount of traffic to their landing pages by having the SEO set up properly, but only if you have the control to set your pages up properly.

5. Integration and Tracking Issues

One of the hardest parts of using the builder in our early agency days was getting the tracking to work. We tried to turn data into stories so we could tell our clients exactly how their customers responded to the funnels.

Embeds too caused some pain. While they aren’t simple even using custom code, for some reason the traditional builders just seem to struggle. When you’re building in calendar booking software, lead capture forms, video players, or any other type of embed, it needs to work (and fast).

Key Takeaways

There’s no perfect system. Traditional landing page/website builders did what was necessary for their time. Now, with the new tools we have, there’s a real opportunity to improve to create a better experience for our landing page viewers. That’s why we built Fig.