--- marp: true paginate: true --- # Choosing Your Ecommerce Foundation ## Adobe Commerce vs. Medusa vs. Custom Go — A Decision Framework for Pharmacy Leaders --- ## Choosing Your Ecommerce Foundation - A platform decision for the next 5–7 years of pharmacy commerce - Adobe Commerce vs. Medusa vs. Custom Go - Prepared by Rangle.io for executive leadership --- ## The Decision in Front of You - Pharmacy ecommerce is now a primary revenue and retention channel - Legacy platforms can't keep pace with refill UX, PBM integration, and compliance change - The platform you pick shapes speed, cost, and risk for years - Goal today: align on a confident, defensible path forward --- ## What Pharmacy Commerce Actually Demands - Compliance by design: HIPAA, PCI-DSS, NABP, state board rules - Prescription workflows: refills, transfers, controlled-substance tracking - Deep integration: PBMs, insurance/claims, EHR, fulfillment & pharmacy systems - Scale and uptime for seasonal surges and 24/7 patient access --- ## The Three Contenders - Adobe Commerce — enterprise, feature-rich, license-heavy SaaS/PaaS - Medusa — open-source, modular, headless commerce in Node.js - Custom Go — purpose-built service engineered for your exact workflows - Each trades off speed, control, and cost differently --- ## Adobe Commerce - Strengths: mature feature set, B2B/B2C, large partner ecosystem - Built-in merchandising, promotions, and admin tooling out of the box - Trade-offs: high license + hosting cost, heavyweight to customize - Compliance: PCI-ready, but HIPAA/pharmacy logic is bolt-on, not native --- ## Medusa - Strengths: open-source, modular, no license fees, modern headless API - Fast to extend with custom modules; strong developer velocity - Trade-offs: younger ecosystem, you own more of the stack and ops - Compliance: flexible foundation — you build to HIPAA/PCI, with control --- ## Custom Go - Strengths: maximum control, performance, and exact-fit workflows - Lean, high-throughput services ideal for refill and claims processing - Trade-offs: highest build effort, longest time-to-market, you own everything - Compliance: designed-in from day one, but no out-of-box commerce features --- ## Side-by-Side at a Glance - Time-to-market: Medusa fastest for fit, Adobe fast for generic, Go slowest - Cost model: Adobe = high license; Medusa = build + ops; Go = highest build - Customization ceiling: Go highest, Medusa high, Adobe constrained - Pharmacy fit: Medusa & Go adapt natively; Adobe requires heavy tailoring --- ## Total Cost & Time-to-Market - Adobe: predictable license, but recurring fees scale with growth - Medusa: zero license, invest in engineering — lowest total cost at scale - Custom Go: highest upfront, justified only by unique competitive workflows - 3-year view: Medusa typically wins on TCO for pharmacy use cases --- ## Through the Compliance & Risk Lens - HIPAA: data isolation and audit trails easier with code you control (Medusa/Go) - PCI-DSS: all three achievable; scope smaller with headless tokenization - NABP & state boards: pharmacy logic must be first-class, not a plugin - Vendor lock-in risk: highest with Adobe, lowest with open-source/custom --- ## Rangle's Recommendation - Lead with Medusa: best balance of speed, cost, control, and compliance fit - Reserve Custom Go for the 1–2 workflows that are true differentiators - Choose Adobe only if you need its ecosystem more than tailored pharmacy UX - Net: a Medusa core with selective Go services maximizes value and minimizes risk --- ## Recommended Next Steps - Run a 4-week discovery: map refill, claims, and compliance workflows - Stand up a Medusa proof-of-concept against your top 3 use cases - Define compliance guardrails (HIPAA/PCI) with your security team - Partner with Rangle to ship a production roadmap in 90 days

Choosing Your Ecommerce Foundation

Deck details

Brief