Build or buy? Cracking the design editor dilemma
Deciding whether to build or buy a design editor for your platform is a pivotal choice that can shape your product's trajectory.
Both options come with trade-offs: building offers complete customization and control but requires significant time, expertise, and resources, while buying provides a ready-made solution that can integrate quickly but may limit flexibility.
The right decision depends on your business goals, technical capacity, and long-term vision. To simplify this process, asking the right questions is crucial –ones that explore your needs, budget, scalability, and user expectations. Let’s break down these considerations to help you choose the best path forward.
1. What specific features and capabilities do you need in a design editor?
When evaluating the specific features and capabilities needed in a design editor, start by identifying your primary use cases and audience. Do your users need basic tools like text editing, shape manipulation, and color customization, or are they looking for advanced features like multi-layer support, template management or video editing?
Consider the importance of integrations – should the editor sync with your existing tools or offer API access for seamless workflows? Performance matters too; ensure it handles high-resolution files and complex designs without lag.
Finally, think about branding – will you need extensive customization to match your platform's look and feel? By defining these needs clearly, you can focus on options that align with your goals.
2. Is this a core feature of our product or a nice-to-have?
To decide if a design editor is a core feature or a nice-to-have, start by assessing your product’s main purpose. Ask yourself: Does this editor directly support the primary value we deliver to users? If your product depends on customization, user-created designs, or visual branding, the editor is leaning towards core. On the other hand, if the editor serves as a supplementary tool rather than a central part of the user experience, it may be more of a nice-to-have. Understanding how integral the editor is to fulfilling your product’s promise will help you determine its priority in your development roadmap.
Next, evaluate user expectations – do customers expect this capability as standard or optional? Finally, consider the business impact – would excluding it significantly affect engagement, conversions, or retention? If the answer to these questions is yes, it’s core. Otherwise, it may be a feature to add later based on demand.
For Predis.ai, an AI-powered marketing platform, visual editor was important but not as much as the AI capability. Here's what Aakash, the co-founder, had to say on their build vs buy decision making…
3. What is the cost of building versus licensing (upfront and ongoing)?
Assessing your internal expertise to build and maintain a design editor requires a critical look at your team’s skills and experience.
Licensing, by contrast, offers a far lower entry cost. The Polotno SDK, for example, is priced at $199–$299 per month, translating to $2,388–$3,588 per year. Even with licensing over five years, your total spend is around $12,000–$18,000, which is a fraction of what it costs to build in-house. Licensing also saves significant opportunity costs—your team can focus on other high-priority tasks while the editor is ready to deploy within weeks, if not days…
"In just a few hours, I customized Polotno, picked the functions I needed, and from then on concentrated on building my business".
Sven Speer
Coamaker founder
There are, however, nuances to consider. Licensing gives you speed and affordability but may limit flexibility. For instance, you might not get full control over the code or be able to implement niche features critical to your vision. Polotno, for example, is built to be highly customizable, and yet there are certain limitations you cannot sneak through (here's a quick overview of what's possible).
Additionally, if the SDK provider discontinues its product or increases prices dramatically, you could face unexpected disruptions or costs (Polotno partially alleviates with source code access available with Enterprise plan). Building offers complete customization and ownership but demands long-term resource commitment and exposes you to technical debt if updates aren’t consistently prioritized.
In most cases, the choice comes down to strategy and priorities. If your editor is a core differentiator, such as for a design-first SaaS product or a creative platform, the upfront investment in building might make sense to ensure you own every aspect of the experience. However, if the editor is simply a supporting feature – something users expect but not the primary value of your product – licensing is the smarter play. You’ll save hundreds of thousands of dollars, launch faster, and keep your team focused on what truly sets your product apart.
"Polotno helped us save 6 months of engineering to build a powerful editor which is a kind of core engine to our business".
Chakra
Lenspost founder
4. Would building an in-house editor give us a unique advantage in our market?
The potential for an in-house editor to provide a competitive edge hinges on how integral the editor is to your product’s core value proposition. If your target audience values highly specialized functionality that existing third-party solutions cannot deliver, building an editor allows you to create unique, tailored features that differentiate your offering. For instance, you might integrate industry-specific workflows, advanced automation, or exclusive design capabilities that directly address your users’ pain points, making your platform stand out in a crowded market.
Key benefits of building in-house:
Tailored functionality: Customize features to meet niche user needs that off-the-shelf solutions can’t address.
Complete control: Own the technology, allowing for faster updates and flexibility to respond to market trends.
Brand alignment: Seamlessly integrate the editor into your platform’s design and branding, ensuring a consistent user experience.
Long-term differentiation: Offer exclusive capabilities that competitors relying on third-party tools can’t replicate.
However, it’s essential to evaluate whether this uniqueness translates to tangible business benefits. Does having a custom editor significantly improve user retention, engagement, or monetization? Are these gains worth the substantial investment and resource allocation required to build and maintain it?
For example:
If your competitors all use similar off-the-shelf solutions, an in-house editor could set you apart by offering features they can’t match.
Conversely, if design editing is not central to your product’s value, the effort may not justify the cost, especially when licensing an SDK like Polotno can provide robust functionality at a fraction of the price.
When to consider building:
Your editor is a key differentiator in your product offering.
You need advanced or niche features that third-party solutions don’t support.
You’re prepared for the long-term commitment to maintain and scale the editor.
Building an in-house editor can provide a unique market position and long-term control but only if its differentiation directly impacts your bottom line. Without this, the resources spent on development might be better directed toward other areas of your product that more significantly enhance user experience and drive growth. This was in many ways the context of Brand Ninja…
3+ months saved
Polotno helped Brand Ninja trim 3+ months from their launch timeline
Cut the need for 2+ devs
Brand Ninja used Polotno to launch without adding more devs to the team.
Launched in 1 week
Brand Ninja went from initial concept to launch in a week using Polotno.
5. What are the key long-term considerations for build vs buy?
When deciding between building or buying a design editor, it’s crucial to think beyond the immediate benefits and weigh the long-term risks and commitments.
Third-party dependency: Relying on a third-party provider introduces the risk of discontinuation, major price increases, or changes in functionality that may not align with your needs. For example, if a provider like Polotno SDK were to discontinue its service, your product could face disruptions unless you have a backup plan or transition strategy. However, many reputable providers offer long-term support and clear roadmaps, reducing the likelihood of unexpected changes.
When evaluating the vendor look for the qualities that make most difference for your context. Here at Polotno, for example, we believe that robust, quality support and assistance are the main drivers of product and our customers' success. That what makes brands with 100+ years of history like Peleman stick to Polotno…
Tech maintenance for in-house solutions: Building in-house eliminates vendor dependency but introduces another challenge: the risk of your technology becoming outdated. If your team lacks the resources to continuously maintain, update, and scale the editor, you could end up with a product that fails to meet user expectations over time. The cost of neglecting maintenance—both in dollars and user trust—can be significant, potentially locking you into technical debt.
Key questions to consider:
What’s our contingency plan if a third-party provider changes its terms or discontinues their product?
Do we have the resources to maintain and update an in-house editor consistently?
How does each option align with our long-term product strategy and growth plans?
Ultimately, both paths come with risks. Licensing offers convenience but requires monitoring provider stability. Building gives you control but demands a long-term commitment to upkeep. Your decision should factor in these trade-offs to ensure your design editor remains a reliable and scalable part of your product over time.
6. Build vs buy: Deciding the future of your design editor
Deciding whether to build or buy a design editor depends on your business goals, resources, and long-term strategy. Building in-house offers full customization, ownership, and potential differentiation, but it’s expensive and resource-intensive, with costs often exceeding $300,000 upfront and ongoing maintenance adding 20–30% annually. Licensing, on the other hand, provides speed, cost efficiency, and built-in support, with solutions like the Polotno SDK costing just $199–$299 per month. However, licensing limits customization and creates dependency on third-party providers.
Ultimately, the decision comes down to whether the editor is a core feature that needs unique functionality or a supporting tool where speed and affordability matter most. Building suits businesses that want full control and long-term differentiation, while licensing is ideal for those seeking a reliable, fast-to-market solution without heavy resource commitments.
You can always choose to build your own editor in-house when the time is right, but why not give Polotno a try first? Polotno’s free trial policy is designed with developers in mind, offering a risk-free way to explore its capabilities. No credit card required—just sign up, deploy it on your private dev server, and experiment without costs until you go live.
As long as your project remains in development, Polotno lets you work hands-off financially. There are no fees, no deadlines—just a robust, fully accessible design tool on your terms. It’s not just a trial; it’s a development partner that supports you through those crucial early stages, helping you save time and resources while delivering a polished user experience.
