Micro frontend architecture

Where and how to use to create maximum value

Contact us

Before filling out the registration form, please read the Privacy notice pursuant to Article 13 of EU Regulation 2016/679

Invalid Input
Invalid Input
Invalid Input
Invalid Input
Invalid Input
Invalid Input
Invalid Input


I declare that I have read and fully understood the Privacy Notice and I hereby express my consent to the processing of my personal data by Reply SpA for marketing purposes, in particular to receive promotional and commercial communications or information regarding company events or webinars, using automated contact means (e.g. SMS, MMS, fax, email and web applications) or traditional methods (e.g. phone calls and paper mail).

What is micro frontend architecture?

Micro frontend architecture is an architectural design approach where the front-end is decomposed into several semi-independent ‘micro apps’ working loosely together. Application frontend is getting complex these days and choosing a right architectural design approach can help to solve problems in a simpler way and makes life of developers easier. This article describes Concept Reply´s experience in working with micro frontends.

Advantages of a micro frontend architecture

  • Maintainable code base: Micro frontends are relatively small, easily maintainable codebases. Dev teams can be more autonomous and it is possible to upgrade, rewrite parts in a more incremental way.
  • Improved reusability: Components in a micro frontend are built independently and in a decoupled way, it is possible to add/remove certain functionalities or certain sections of code in a relatively easier way compared to single monolithic application.
  • Independent development: Each micro frontend can be developed in a more isolated environment, having a separate development process which includes implementation, CI/CD integration, testing, and release.

Efficiency and Speed

Considering all the benefits, the Concept Reply experts used a micro frontend approach in one of their projects to see if they – and therefore their clients – can benefit and improve development activities like efficiency and speed.

In this example of a Concept Reply project, Frontend has one main application which includes all other micro frontends. It was difficult to do changes in any of the micro frontends. For instance, if an existing component needs to be reworked or to create new UI components in a micro frontend.

The team need to create a develop/test component like a working area to test the changes. Moreover, the micro frontend has a different structure to be used in other projects and to test the changes. It has to be built manually and when the build is successful, they can start the test component locally like every other Frontend project in React/Angular. Doing a build manually and then starting the project again locally takes some time and this overall increases the development time. When they are done with changes the developers test with the main application. Every project has a different setup, but, in most of the cases, when feature branch is merged to dev, there is a release to DEV system, then probably to INT or TEST and finally to PROD system. After the changes in one of the micro frontends, they create a prerelease version which can be used for testing in main application. Basically, the micro frontends are installed as libraries similar to libraries from npm. Concept Reply team use the new version in the main application, install them and then were good to test the latest changes from the micro frontend.

Generally, it is a good practice to define universal styling for certain lay outing such as form elements, buttons etc. and use those elsewhere in other components. When there is a new requirement to adapt styling of a component in a micro frontend, which uses some stylings or overrides certain CSS styling from universal styling, it again takes a bit longer to do the change and finish the whole development process.

Overall, doing changes in the micro frontend takes longer than usual and it can be even harder when larger changes need to be done.

Upgradation of Frontend framework is happening so fast and there is major version release in short span of time. While it’s good to keep the frameworks upgraded to have the latest changes and performance improvements, it can be quite hard to do the same with a micro frontend architecture. Doing a version upgrade for every micro frontend, fix the problems from new updates and then create a release version with the newest upgrade. Repeat the process for all micro frontends and upgradation itself could take a lot of effort. Facing this problem by upgrading to next major version with the Frontend framework.

Concept Reply experts have worked with several Frontend projects and would like to give another example of our experience in a project with a comparatively complex frontend. With many developers working on different features, several sections of the Frontend need to be adapted – with a negative experience. They didn’t face some of the problems in micro frontend approach here. Development activity was much faster, since there is no need to do changes in a micro service, build, create a pre-release version and then use in the main application. Also, they could see no downside in the overall process from development, testing, to production deployment. By following certain development principles with proper coding guidelines, proper structuring for components, using shared components wherever necessary have helped them in smooth development, maintaining code quality and timely delivery.


By having worked in both of these architectures, there are pros and cons in micro frontend and monolith approaches.

Depending on the projects requirement, using a micro frontend suits only if there is a need for it. If the Frontend is complex, involving diverse features, the team can be split into smaller groups, working on micro frontends independently, taking care of development, testing and releases. In that case it absolutely makes sense to go for micro frontend architecture to get the most out of it.

For all the other cases sticking to monolith approach is the best way to go as a micro frontend approach adds additional bottlenecks and complexity. Overall, the architectural design decision for any frontend should be made considering the requirements of the application, complexity and the amount of effort needed to maintain rather than baized biased towards any approach.
  • strip-0

    Concept Reply

    Concept Reply is an IoT software developer specializing in the research, development and validation of innovative solutions and supports its customers in the automotive, manufacturing, smart infrastructure and other industries in all matters relating to the Internet of Things (IoT) and cloud computing. The goal is to offer end-to-end solutions along the entire value chain: from the definition of an IoT strategy, through testing and quality assurance, to the implementation of a concrete solution.