Which migration strategies move a cloud-incompatible CMS with least effort?
Short answer
CD Replace the incompatible CMS with a cloud-based product (repurchase) or make only minor cloud optimizations (replatform) to migrate it with the least effort.
Question
Key Takeaways
Tests the 6 R migration strategies against two constraints at once — 'LEAST effort' and an application that is explicitly incompatible with cloud — and the trap is reflexively choosing rehost, the lowest-effort strategy in general, when the scenario has already ruled it out.
When a CMS is found to be incompatible with cloud environments, the least-effort migration paths are repurchase (drop-and-shop to a cloud/SaaS CMS) and replatform (lift, tinker, and shift with only minor changes). This page explains why rehost is contradicted by the incompatibility premise and why retire and refactor are not viable.
Common mistake: Choosing Rehost (B) because lift-and-shift is the classic 'least effort' answer; the audit states the CMS is incompatible with cloud environments, so a no-change move cannot make the application work in AWS.
Expert Analysis
Why the Answer Is Correct
The question asks for two strategies that both migrate the CMS and require the LEAST effort, while the scenario adds the hard constraint that the application is "incompatible with cloud environments." Replatform (D) fits because lift, tinker, and shift means a few targeted cloud optimizations — a managed database, a supported OS, minor configuration changes — rather than re-architecting the product, which is the lowest-effort way to keep the application and fix the compatibility gap. Repurchase (C), AWS's "drop and shop" strategy, fits even better for a CMS because the company simply replaces the unsupported product with a cloud-ready or SaaS alternative, requiring no development work at all; AWS's own examples of repurchase are CRM to Salesforce and CMS to Drupal. Together, C and D satisfy both the 'LEAST effort' requirement and the incompatibility problem, whereas the two highest-effort or non-migrating options (E and A) do not.
Why the Other Options Are Wrong
Retire (A) is not a migration at all — it decommissions the CMS, which removes the application rather than moving it to AWS, so it cannot answer a question about migrating the CMS. Rehost (B) means lift-and-shift with no changes to the application, so it cannot resolve a compatibility defect that was found during a system audit; a zero-change move of software that does not run in the cloud is a contradiction. Refactor (E) is the re-architect strategy and requires the most development effort and the longest timeline, which directly violates the 'LEAST effort' wording. That leaves only Repurchase and Replatform as strategies that both move the CMS to AWS and keep the effort minimal.
Community Comment Notes
Community opinion is split — the BC and CD answer groups are close — and the disagreement is almost entirely about option B. JoeTromundo puts the key objection plainly: "It can't be B: the application is INCOMPATIBLE with cloud environments." VerRi reaches the same conclusion from the premise, explaining that incompatibility means the CMS cannot be migrated as-is, so "Rehost does not work." geocis argues the opposite way by eliminating A and E ("Choosing to Retire will not help them migrate."), which is sound reasoning even though it lands on rehost. Matthew25187 uses the same elimination chain and ends at Repurchase and Replatform, while femzy lists Rehost and Replatform as the two lowest-effort paths and Nikmah cites the course example of repurchase being "CMS to Drupal." MeLikeChoco adds a practical caveat that the right choice depends on whether the CMS is in-house or third-party, which is exactly why the question's 'incompatible' premise drives the answer.
Official Reference
- https://docs.aws.amazon.com/prescriptive-guidance/latest/large-migration-guide/migration-strategies.html
- https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/enterprise-strategy/6-strategies-for-migrating-applications-to-the-cloud/
These links open the official vendor documentation in a new tab.
Exam Strategy
On 'Choose two' CLF-C02 questions, apply the scenario premise first: any strategy the scenario already contradicts (here, a no-change rehost of an incompatible application) is eliminated before you rank effort. Only then rank the remaining migration strategies by effort, remembering that refactor is always the most expensive and retire is not a migration at all.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why is rehost wrong for a CMS that is incompatible with cloud environments?
How does repurchase migrate an incompatible CMS with little effort?
Community Votes
60% of anonymous learners picked answer BC. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.
Discussion 13 contributions
Compiled from public community threads and reader submissions, lightly edited for clarity. Handles and vote tallies are shown as recorded, and comments reflect the views of individual contributors.
From public community threads 13
-
geocis 👍 6It's not (E) Refactor, requiring significant development effort and increased migration timelines. I don't think (A) Retire is an option only because the question states which strategies will help the company migrate the CMS application with the LEAST effort. Choosing to Retire will not help them migrate. This leaves us with Rehost, Repurchase, and Replatform. Based on the following and a process of elimination, my choices would be B and C. B) Rehost - Benefits: Rapid migration, minimal code changes, reduced risk. May not fully leverage cloud-native features, potential for suboptimal cost and performance. C) Repurchase - Benefits: Rapid migration, reduced maintenance burden, potential for cost savings. Limited customization, potential for data migration challenges. D) Replatform - Benefits: Balance of speed and optimization, leverage cloud benefits. Requires careful planning, potential for increased complexity.
-
Zerro 👍 4Please someone say what is the correct answer. I don't believe in any of those given "correct" answers as most of them are plain wrong
-
JoeTromundo 👍 4It can't be B: the application is INCOMPATIBLE with cloud environments. C and D are the least effort option, in this case.
-
b0nb0n101 👍 2A. Retire C. Repurchase Retire: If the CMS application is not compatible and not necessary for business operations, the company could choose to retire it. This would involve decommissioning the application and not replacing it. Repurchase: This strategy, also known as "drop and shop", involves moving to a different product. The company could choose to replace the incompatible CMS with a cloud-compatible CMS. This could be a SaaS solution or a CMS designed to run in the cloud. This strategy typically requires less effort than rehosting, replatforming, or refactoring, as it involves setting up a new system rather than modifying the existing one.
-
Matthew25187 👍 2By a process of elimination... A) is out, because the 2nd paragraph makes it clear the company wants to continue to use a CMS application in a cloud environment, and B) is out, because the audit determined that the existing application is "... incompatible with cloud environments," and E) is out, because it doesn't meet the "LEAST effort" requirement. That leaves (C) and (D).
Show 8 more comments
-
VerRi 👍 2"Incompatible with cloud environments" means the CMS cannot be migrated to the cloud. Rehost does not work.
-
Meow7 👍 2probably BC please help with discussion on 482~498. Thanks.
-
femzy 👍 1The two migration strategies that will help the company migrate the CMS application with the LEAST effort are: B. Rehost D. Replatform Explanation: Rehost (Lift-and-Shift): This strategy involves moving the application to the cloud with minimal or no changes. Replatform (Lift-Tinker-and-Shift): This strategy involves making minor optimizations to the application to make it compatible with the cloud environment. Why not the other options? A. Retire: This means decommissioning the application, which is not applicable here since the company wants to migrate the CMS. C. Repurchase: This involves switching to a different product (e.g., a SaaS CMS). While it may reduce effort in some cases, it is not necessarily the least effort if the company wants to retain its existing CMS. E. Refactor: This involves re-architecting the application to be cloud-native, which requires significant effort and is not the least effort option.
-
FMORADELL 👍 1A. Retire: If the application is outdated or not necessary for future operations, retiring it can be the easiest and most cost-effective strategy. C. Repurchase: This strategy is also known as "drop and shop," where you replace your existing application with a cloud-based solution. It’s often easier than modifying or rehosting an incompatible application.
-
Nikmah 👍 1Repurchase “drop and shop” • Moving to a different product while moving to the Cloud • Often you move to a SaaS platform • Expensive in the short term, but quick to deploy • Example: CRM to Salesforce.com, HR to Workday, CMS to Drupal
-
MeLikeChoco 👍 1It all depends on if the CMS is in-house or 3rd party and if they want to keep it in-house or 3rd party. Either way, I believe retiring the CMS is a given. But the other choice, not so much.
-
Zerro 👍 2I think it's B and C
-
CTao 👍 1I think it should be A and B
Reader comments & corrections
No reader corrections yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.
Related Analysis
Practice All CLF-C02 Questions
Access 120 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.
View Full CLF-C02 Practice Test →