Gutenberg vs. Page Builders in WordPress (2025): Who’s Using What?

Share

WordPress page-builder share at a glance

The table below converts each builder’s share of all websites into an approximate share inside WordPress (i.e., builder% ÷ WordPress%). These are rounded estimates, good for direction and planning rather than exact counts.

Builder	≈ Share of all websites	≈ Share inside WordPress
Elementor	~12.9%	~29.8%
WPBakery	~3.8%	~8.8%
Beaver Builder	~0.4%	~0.9%
Oxygen	~0.2%	~0.5%
Divi Builder	~0.1%	~0.23%
Bricks	~0.1%	~0.23%
Thrive Architect	~0.1%	~0.23%

What this implies: summing the detectable third-party builders lands around ~40–41% of WordPress sites. The remaining ~59–60% are Gutenberg, Classic, or custom.

---

So how big is Gutenberg?

While there’s no perfect census that directly measures Gutenberg usage across every WordPress site, several independent signals converge on the same picture:

• Gutenberg is now the most common editor across WordPress installations.
• Classic Editor usage continues to taper, though it remains significant on legacy or highly customized sites.
• Legacy builders (e.g., WPBakery) have been trending down, while Elementor remains strong and newer builders (Bricks, Oxygen) occupy niche but growing segments.

Putting that together with the builder totals above, a reasonable working split today looks like:

• Gutenberg (block editor): ~50–60%
• Third-party builders (combined): ~40%
• Classic/no-builder/custom: remainder within the Gutenberg share estimate above (varies by niche and project age)

Treat these as directional numbers—useful for strategy, migration planning, and tooling decisions, not as an audit of your specific segment.

---

Is Gutenberg growing or shrinking?

Growing. Each year, more teams move new builds to Gutenberg and/or progressively convert older sites. The drivers:

• Core keeps improving (Patterns, Layouts, Data Views, Interactivity API, Site Editor).
• Theme + pattern ecosystems are maturing, reducing the need for heavy builder stacks.
• Performance and maintainability pressures (Core Web Vitals, fewer plugins, simpler DOM) favor native blocks for many marketing sites.

At the same time, Elementor remains popular—especially for freelancer and agency workflows that rely on its design system, widget library, and established processes.

---

Choosing your stack in 2025 and coming into 2026

Pick Gutenberg if you want:

• A core-first approach with fewer moving parts and good performance
• A clean hand-off to content teams who already know WordPress
• Easy reuse via Patterns, Synced Patterns, and the Site Editor

Pick a third-party builder if you want:

• A unified design system and large widget ecosystem out of the box (Elementor)
• Pixel-precise control and opinionated workflows (e.g., Bricks/Oxygen for dev-heavy builds)
• A familiar stack that your team delivers quickly with today

Hybrid is common: Many teams standardize on Gutenberg for most builds, but keep one builder in the toolbox for specific use-cases or legacy constraints.

---

Method notes (how these numbers were derived)

• Start with the share of all websites for each builder and for WordPress overall.
• Convert to an inside-WordPress share by dividing builder share by WordPress share.
• Sum the major builders to estimate the combined third-party builder share within WordPress.
• The Gutenberg share is inferred from what’s left (plus community surveys and version/adoption signals), acknowledging that some of that remainder includes Classic and custom setups.

---

Bottom line

Your best choice depends on team skills, site type, and longevity. If you’re starting fresh in 2025, Gutenberg is the safest default, with a builder reserved for cases where its strengths clearly outweigh the added complexity.

Gutenberg leads and is gaining ground.

Third-party builders still power roughly two out of five WordPress sites and won’t disappear—Elementor in particular remains a powerhouse.