Home Editorials Breaking Down the Differences Between Composable Commerce and Monolithic eCommerce Platforms

Breaking Down the Differences Between Composable Commerce and Monolithic eCommerce Platforms

The world of commerce has undergone a significant transformation in recent years, largely driven by technological advancements and changing consumer preferences. One of the pivotal developments in this evolution is the rise of Composable Commerce, a novel approach that challenges the conventional wisdom of traditional E-Commerce platforms. Though traditional or monolithic ecommerce platforms have historically provided a convenient way to establish an online store quickly, but they can sometimes lack the adaptability required to keep up with swiftly changing market dynamics.

Let’s shed light on these approaches, exploring how they differ and what can be the best choice for scaling businesses.

What is Composable Commerce?

Composable Commerce is a paradigm shift in how business’s structure and operate their digital commerce ecosystems. At its core, it emphasizes modularity, flexibility, and agility. Instead of relying on a monolithic E-Commerce platform, Composable Commerce leverages microservices and APIs to create a tailored commerce architecture. This allows businesses to choose and integrate best-of-breed solutions for various aspects of their online operations, such as catalog management, checkout processes, payments, and more.

Composable Commerce is a groundbreaking approach that challenges the conventional model of E-Commerce platforms.

Traditional or Monolithic E-Commerce Platforms: The Status Quo

Monolithic E-Commerce platforms refer to a type of software architecture where the entire E-Commerce application is built as a single, cohesive unit. In this architecture, all the components, functionalities, and modules of the platform are tightly integrated and packaged together into a single software application.

These platforms have been the bedrock of online retail for years. They offer pre-packaged solutions encompassing everything from storefront design to backend functionalities. These platforms are known for their convenience, offering a one-size-fits-all solution that simplifies setup and management. However, they can sometimes fall short in meeting unique business needs and adapting to rapid changes in the market.

Composable Commerce Vs Monolithic Platforms

The decision between Composable Commerce and traditional E-Commerce platforms is not just about technological preferences; it’s about shaping a business’s digital strategy in an increasingly competitive landscape. With the rise of consumer expectations for seamless experiences across devices, the way businesses engage with customers online has taken centre stage. This comparison holds significance because it paves the way for businesses to make informed decisions about their commerce architecture, one that aligns with evolving consumer behaviour and technological innovation.

As businesses strive to stay relevant and ahead of the curve, it’s imperative to understand the nuances of these two approaches and their implications. Evolving business strategies demand agility and customization to cater to unique customer demands. Technological advancements enable businesses to harness the power of APIs, microservices, and data analytics to create unparalleled shopping experiences. This comparison, therefore, serves as a guiding light for businesses seeking to align their strategies with the dynamic digital commerce landscape.

Flexibility and Customization:

Composable Commerce shines in the realm of flexibility and customization. Businesses can pick and choose the components that best align with their specific requirements, allowing for a highly tailored and modular architecture. This agility empowers businesses to adapt to changing market dynamics and experiment with new features without being constrained by a rigid platform structure. Traditional E-Commerce platforms, while convenient, often struggle to match this level of adaptability.

Scalability and Performance:

The microservices architecture of Composable Commerce inherently supports scalability. Businesses can scale individual components independently, enhancing overall performance and responsiveness. In contrast, traditional platforms may face limitations in handling sudden spikes in traffic or accommodating growth without substantial reengineering.

Integration and Innovation:

Composable Commerce’s reliance on APIs facilitates seamless integration with external services and tools, fostering innovation. Businesses can incorporate emerging technologies like AI-driven personalization or blockchain-based transactions without major overhauls. Traditional platforms might lag in integrating such cutting-edge solutions due to their integrated nature.

Handling Traffic Spikes:

Due to its granular scalability, Composable Commerce is better equipped to handle sudden spikes in traffic. If a specific component experiences a surge in activity (e.g., during a sale), businesses can allocate resources to that component alone, ensuring uninterrupted user experience.

Monolithic systems might struggle with traffic spikes as scaling the entire application might lead to resource wastage or underperformance in certain areas.


Traditional E-Commerce platforms offer quicker deployment, making them suitable for businesses seeking rapid entry into the digital space. Composable Commerce, while more intricate to set up, offers a longer-term advantage as it can be precisely tailored to customer needs, potentially leading to higher customer satisfaction and loyalty.

Future Growth:

Composable Commerce accommodates future growth more effectively. As a business expands, it can scale individual microservices as needed, ensuring a seamless user experience even as the platform becomes more complex.

Monolithic systems might face limitations in supporting future growth without substantial reengineering, which can be time-consuming and resource intensive.

Maintenance and Upgrades

Traditional E-Commerce platforms face intricacies during maintenance and upgrades due to tightly integrated components. Changes in one area risk affecting others, demanding cautious testing to avoid unforeseen issues. Upgrades often entail the entire platform, risking downtime.

On the other hand, Composable Commerce offers a modular approach. Independent microservices enable precise maintenance and upgrades. Changes stay confined, simplifying testing and reducing downtime risk. Businesses can swiftly introduce enhancements, fix issues, or add features, enhancing user experience.

Fault Isolation:

In Composable Commerce, if a specific microservice experiences issues, it can be isolated and addressed without affecting the entire system. This prevents downtime and minimizes the impact on users.

Issues in one part of a monolithic platform can potentially affect the entire application, leading to service interruptions and degraded user experience.

Resource Management:

With the ability to scale specific microservices, Composable Commerce optimizes resource management. Resources can be allocated precisely where needed, resulting in better performance and cost-effectiveness during peak times.

While resource management can be less efficient in monolithic platforms. Scaling the entire application might lead to higher infrastructure costs and a less responsive system, especially if only certain components require additional resources.

Cost Efficiency:

Composable Commerce’s scalability promotes cost efficiency by enabling businesses to allocate resources where they are needed most. This prevents over provisioning and allows for better management of infrastructure costs.

Scaling the entire monolithic platform can result in higher infrastructure costs during peak times, as resources are allocated to components that might not require them.

Closing Note

Though composable commerce wins the game when compared to monolithic ecommerce platforms but it is important to note that composable commerce fits appropriately for businesses that are scaling or are already big in scale. Small businesses need not adopt a composable approach as it can get very costly for them while they can’t even make use of it efficiently.