Skip to main content
Talk to an expert
ServiceLuma to Hyvä migration

Luma to Hyvä migration, scoped honestly.

Moving a Luma-based Magento frontend to Hyvä is a specific kind of project. It is a chance to reduce frontend complexity and shed accumulated custom code, not a chance to ship a clean platform pitch. We help decide what to rebuild, retain or replace, and we name the risks around extensions, custom checkout, tracking and frontend behaviour up front.
600+
Commerce projects
40+
Engineers · on staff
31
Years · systems behind commerce
1995
Founded
Contents · 6 sections
  1. 01Luma to Hyvä, scoped honestly
  2. 02Selected case studies.
  3. 03How this platform fits the wider commerce estate.
  4. 04Questions we get asked.
  5. 05Clients we build for.
  6. 06Where this fits in the wider estate.
01 · Luma to Hyvä, scoped honestly

Luma to Hyvä, scoped honestly

Why Luma to Hyvä is its own project
A Luma frontend usually carries years of custom code, overrides and extensions. The migration is as much a clean-up as a rebuild; that needs scoping, not assumed.
Decide what to rebuild, retain or replace
Not every component or behaviour deserves a Hyvä rebuild. Some custom UI gets retired in the move; some gets rebuilt; some gets replaced with native Hyvä patterns.
Extension audit
Every extension on the Luma frontend reviewed for Hyvä compatibility, replacement or removal. Surprise extension work is the most common Luma to Hyvä project risk.
Tracking, tag manager and analytics
GTM, GA4, server-side tagging and consent setups audited so the migration does not silently break reporting, attribution or compliance.
Scripts, widgets and third-party UI
Reviews widgets, chat, recommenders and other third-party scripts mapped against Hyvä-compatible alternatives or kept under controlled boundaries.
SEO, URLs and structured data
URL structure, redirects, structured data and internal linking preserved through the move. SEO continuity is a planning task, not a launch surprise.
B2B and trade behaviour kept working
Trade-account pricing, depot stock, quote behaviour and self-service flows kept working through the migration; B2B is treated as a first-class concern.
Staged rollout protects trading
Migration sequenced by domain, template family or traffic share. The store keeps trading throughout; we avoid big-bang relaunches.
Honest "is now the right time" read
Where the Luma site is stable and the operating model does not justify the rebuild, we will say so rather than push a relaunch.
02 · Relevant iWeb work
03 · Platform fit and estate context

How this platform fits the wider commerce estate.

Fit against operational shape
Catalogue depth, trade complexity, branch logic and ERP integration named honestly before the platform decision is fixed, not assumed from a vendor demo.
Integration boundary with ERP
ERP owns commercial data, pricing and stock. The commerce platform reads the boundary through governed APIs; the boundary itself is the most important design decision in the estate.
PIM as the catalogue system of record
Deep catalogue governance lives in PIM (Akeneo, Salsify or similar). The commerce platform reads from PIM rather than re-modelling product data in the storefront.
OMS and fulfilment surface
Order management, partial dispatch, returns and customer-visible order state live in operational systems. The platform reads what operations actually did.
Search and merchandising
Native search plus specialist engines (Algolia, Constructor.io) assessed against the actual query mix, not a vendor benchmark. Relevance is a continuous activity.
B2B and trade behaviour
Account-only catalogues, customer-specific pricing, depot stock, quote-to-cart and partial dispatch modelled inside the platform rather than patched at the storefront.
Multi-store and multi-territory
Brand, market and territory storefronts modelled with shared catalogue, pricing and operations rather than parallel sites that drift apart.
Total cost over five years
Licence, hosting, engineering and support modelled honestly across the lifecycle, not just year one. The cheap year-one platform is often the expensive five-year one.
Headless and composable trade-offs
Headless or composable storefronts where they earn their place, not as a default. The trade-off between optionality and integration surface is named upfront.
Operational ownership and runbook
Long-term support, releases and integration ownership inside a UK agency that runs platforms day to day, with a written runbook the on-call team can act on.
Replatform sequencing
Where a platform move is on the table, sequencing by domain, traffic share or territory keeps trading live throughout. Big-bang relaunches are rarely the right shape.
Honest "do not move" advice
Where the existing platform is the right answer, iWeb says so on the record. A senior, written read on the brief is the deliverable, not a sales pitch.
04 · Questions we get asked

Questions we get asked.

Will moving from Luma to Hyvä fix our performance problems?

Only if the problem lives in the frontend. If it sits in the catalogue, integrations, hosting or ERP, Hyvä alone will not solve it; we will say so.

Do all our Luma extensions transfer?

No. Some have Hyvä-compatible variants, some need replacing, some can be retired. The extension audit happens before the build is scoped.

Should we keep custom Luma checkout code?

Sometimes yes, sometimes the move is the right time to simplify. The checkout decision is explicit in the migration plan, not implicit.

Will SEO traffic drop after the migration?

Not if URLs, redirects, structured data and internal linking are preserved. SEO continuity is planned up front, not patched after the relaunch.

Can iWeb take over an in-flight Luma to Hyvä project?

Yes. We give a senior, written read on what is working, what needs remediation and what is honestly fixable, then stabilise before scoping more change.

How does iWeb choose between platforms?

Against operational shape: catalogue depth, trade complexity, ERP integration, multi-territory rules and five-year cost. The decision is written down with trade-offs, not assumed from a vendor demo.

Where does ERP integration sit in the platform decision?

It is a primary input. Some platforms make ERP integration straightforward, some make it expensive. iWeb names the trade-off rather than hiding it.

Does iWeb deliver headless or composable storefronts?

Where they earn their place. The trade-off between optionality and integration surface is named upfront; composable is not a default.

How is search handled on this platform?

Native search where the query mix supports it; specialist engines (Algolia, Constructor.io) where the catalogue, volume or merchandising appetite justify them. Relevance is a continuous activity.

Where does PIM sit relative to the commerce platform?

PIM owns catalogue truth (attributes, variants, assets, channel readiness). The commerce platform reads from PIM rather than re-modelling deep product data in the storefront.

Can iWeb take over an existing build on this platform?

Yes, where the brief fits. iWeb will give a senior, written read on what is working, what needs remediation and what is honestly fixable, and the first month on support stays deliberately conservative on change.

How does iWeb size a five-year total cost picture?

Licence, hosting, engineering and support across the lifecycle, including the integration surface and operational ownership. The headline year-one number is rarely the honest comparison.

Accreditations & assurance
Gold Commerce Partner
Specialised in Commerce & AI
ISO certified
27001 · 9001 · 42001
Cyber Essentials Plus
Independently verified security
WCAG 2.2 AA
Accessibility embedded by design
Employee-owned
The same team, long term
Next step

Talk to a Hyvä developer

Send the brief. You'll get a written response from a senior expert on the platform, ERP and operational realities we'd look at first, not a pitch deck.
Talk to an expertor see hyvä migration →