Download websites that use Sitevision CMS

Certain content systems are never chosen on features. Sitevision CMS is one of them. The platform is a Proprietary product from Sitevision AB, built in Java and sold since 2002, and it is bought through public procurement by municipalities, agencies, universities and large employers rather than picked off a comparison page by a marketing team. Almost everything interesting about the population follows from that.

Procurement leaves marks on a product. A system sold into the public sector has to answer for accessibility conformance, records retention, identity federation with directories the organisation already runs, and multi site management for the many departments sitting under one authority. Feature lists reflect those obligations rather than a content editor's wish list. So a site running the platform is very likely a public body or a regulated institution, on a Java stack maintained by an internal team or a long term integrator, under a contract that renews on a fixed cycle instead of a monthly subscription.

The buying cycle is why the whole list is worth more than a lookup. Public sector web contracts are tendered, dated and slow, and the useful question is never whether one authority runs the platform. The useful questions are how many institutions in a given country and registry sit on it, which of them share a regional integrator, what else is in their stacks, and how the population moves between exports as tenders are won and lost. A competitor pitching against the incumbent needs the full set with countries and domains attached. A supplier of modules, search or accessibility auditing wants the same file for the opposite reason.

As of October 2026 we detect Sitevision CMS on 1,280 sites in the CMS category. The vendor's origins are Nordic and the assumption in the market is that the install base follows, but an assumption is not a measurement. The country and top level domain fields in the export exist so a reader can check the real shape of the distribution instead of repeating what everyone says about it.

One limitation deserves a plain statement. Enterprise Java platforms are frequently served through a reverse proxy, a caching layer or a rebuilt front end that strips the fingerprints a detector depends on, and public sector sites in particular are hardened, stripped of version disclosure and delivered through a CDN. The direction of the error runs one way. Sites we can identify are those that left something visible, so the recorded count understates the deployed base, and the sites missing from it skew toward the carefully run installations.