Back to Blog
Micro FrontendsArchitectureFrontendScalability

Micro Frontends: Architecture for Scalable Frontend Teams

Learn when and how to implement micro frontends. From module federation to web components, understand the patterns and trade-offs.

B
Bootspring Team
Engineering
July 10, 2025
6 min read

Micro frontends apply microservices principles to frontend development—breaking monolithic UIs into independently deployable pieces owned by different teams. Here's when this makes sense and how to implement it.

What Are Micro Frontends?#

Monolithic Frontend#

Single codebase, single build, single deployment ├── Header (Team A modified) ├── Product Catalog (Team B owns) ├── Shopping Cart (Team C owns) └── Checkout (Team B modified) Problems: - Coordination overhead - Deployment coupling - Scaling teams is hard - Technology lock-in

Micro Frontend Architecture#

Independent apps, independent builds, independent deployments ├── Shell App (Platform Team) │ ├── Header MFE (Team A) │ ├── Catalog MFE (Team B) │ ├── Cart MFE (Team C) │ └── Checkout MFE (Team D) Benefits: - Independent deployments - Team autonomy - Technology diversity - Incremental upgrades

When to Use Micro Frontends#

Good Fit#

✓ Large organization (5+ frontend teams) ✓ Different teams own different features ✓ Need independent deployment cycles ✓ Diverse technology requirements ✓ Gradual migration of legacy systems

Poor Fit#

✗ Small teams (< 5 developers) ✗ Single-page applications with tight coupling ✗ No clear domain boundaries ✗ Need maximum performance ✗ Simple content sites

Integration Patterns#

Build-Time Integration#

1// package.json 2{ 3 "dependencies": { 4 "@team-a/header": "^1.0.0", 5 "@team-b/catalog": "^2.1.0", 6 "@team-c/cart": "^1.5.0" 7 } 8}
1// Shell application 2import Header from '@team-a/header'; 3import Catalog from '@team-b/catalog'; 4import Cart from '@team-c/cart'; 5 6function App() { 7 return ( 8 <> 9 <Header /> 10 <main> 11 <Catalog /> 12 <Cart /> 13 </main> 14 </> 15 ); 16}

Pros: Simple, type-safe, optimized bundle Cons: Requires shell rebuild for updates, version coupling

Runtime Integration (Module Federation)#

1// webpack.config.js (Shell) 2const ModuleFederationPlugin = require('webpack/lib/container/ModuleFederationPlugin'); 3 4module.exports = { 5 plugins: [ 6 new ModuleFederationPlugin({ 7 name: 'shell', 8 remotes: { 9 header: 'header@https://header.example.com/remoteEntry.js', 10 catalog: 'catalog@https://catalog.example.com/remoteEntry.js', 11 cart: 'cart@https://cart.example.com/remoteEntry.js', 12 }, 13 shared: ['react', 'react-dom'], 14 }), 15 ], 16};
1// Dynamic loading in shell 2const Header = React.lazy(() => import('header/Header')); 3const Catalog = React.lazy(() => import('catalog/Catalog')); 4const Cart = React.lazy(() => import('cart/Cart')); 5 6function App() { 7 return ( 8 <Suspense fallback={<Loading />}> 9 <Header /> 10 <main> 11 <Catalog /> 12 <Cart /> 13 </main> 14 </Suspense> 15 ); 16}

Pros: True independence, runtime updates, partial failures Cons: Runtime overhead, complexity, shared dependency coordination

Web Components#

1// Team A: header-component.js 2class HeaderComponent extends HTMLElement { 3 connectedCallback() { 4 this.innerHTML = `<header>...</header>`; 5 } 6} 7customElements.define('app-header', HeaderComponent);
1<!-- Shell --> 2<script src="https://header.example.com/header-component.js" async></script> 3<script src="https://catalog.example.com/catalog-component.js" async></script> 4 5<app-header></app-header> 6<app-catalog></app-catalog> 7<app-cart></app-cart>

Pros: Framework agnostic, native browser support Cons: Limited styling options, SSR challenges

iframes#

<iframe src="https://catalog.example.com" />

Pros: Complete isolation Cons: Poor UX, SEO issues, communication overhead

Module Federation Deep Dive#

Exposing Components#

1// webpack.config.js (Catalog MFE) 2module.exports = { 3 plugins: [ 4 new ModuleFederationPlugin({ 5 name: 'catalog', 6 filename: 'remoteEntry.js', 7 exposes: { 8 './ProductList': './src/components/ProductList', 9 './ProductDetail': './src/components/ProductDetail', 10 './SearchBar': './src/components/SearchBar', 11 }, 12 shared: { 13 react: { singleton: true, requiredVersion: '^18.0.0' }, 14 'react-dom': { singleton: true, requiredVersion: '^18.0.0' }, 15 'react-router-dom': { singleton: true }, 16 }, 17 }), 18 ], 19};

Shared State#

1// shared-state package (consumed by all MFEs) 2import { create } from 'zustand'; 3 4export interface User { 5 id: string; 6 name: string; 7 cart: CartItem[]; 8} 9 10export const useUserStore = create<UserState>((set) => ({ 11 user: null, 12 setUser: (user) => set({ user }), 13 addToCart: (item) => set((state) => ({ 14 user: { 15 ...state.user, 16 cart: [...state.user.cart, item], 17 }, 18 })), 19}));
1// Module federation shared config 2shared: { 3 'shared-state': { 4 singleton: true, 5 eager: true, 6 }, 7}

Communication Between MFEs#

1// Custom events (framework agnostic) 2// Catalog MFE 3function handleProductClick(product: Product) { 4 window.dispatchEvent( 5 new CustomEvent('product:selected', { detail: product }) 6 ); 7} 8 9// Cart MFE 10useEffect(() => { 11 const handler = (e: CustomEvent) => { 12 addToCart(e.detail); 13 }; 14 window.addEventListener('product:selected', handler); 15 return () => window.removeEventListener('product:selected', handler); 16}, []);

Routing#

Shell-Owned Routing#

1// Shell handles all routing 2import { Routes, Route } from 'react-router-dom'; 3 4function App() { 5 return ( 6 <Routes> 7 <Route path="/" element={<Home />} /> 8 <Route path="/products/*" element={<CatalogMFE />} /> 9 <Route path="/cart/*" element={<CartMFE />} /> 10 <Route path="/checkout/*" element={<CheckoutMFE />} /> 11 </Routes> 12 ); 13}

MFE-Owned Routing#

1// Each MFE handles its own routes 2// Catalog MFE 3function CatalogRoutes() { 4 return ( 5 <Routes> 6 <Route path="/" element={<ProductList />} /> 7 <Route path="/:productId" element={<ProductDetail />} /> 8 <Route path="/category/:category" element={<CategoryPage />} /> 9 </Routes> 10 ); 11}

Styling Strategies#

CSS Modules / Scoped Styles#

/* catalog.module.css */ .productCard { /* Scoped to this component */ }

CSS-in-JS with Namespacing#

import styled from 'styled-components'; const ProductCard = styled.div` /* Isolated by generated class names */ `;

Shadow DOM#

1class CatalogComponent extends HTMLElement { 2 constructor() { 3 super(); 4 this.attachShadow({ mode: 'open' }); 5 } 6 7 connectedCallback() { 8 this.shadowRoot.innerHTML = ` 9 <style> 10 .product { /* Isolated styles */ } 11 </style> 12 <div class="product">...</div> 13 `; 14 } 15}

Testing Micro Frontends#

Unit Testing (Same as Before)#

1// Each MFE has its own tests 2import { render, screen } from '@testing-library/react'; 3import ProductCard from './ProductCard'; 4 5test('displays product name', () => { 6 render(<ProductCard product={{ name: 'Test' }} />); 7 expect(screen.getByText('Test')).toBeInTheDocument(); 8});

Integration Testing#

1// Test MFE integration in shell 2describe('Shell Integration', () => { 3 it('loads catalog MFE', async () => { 4 render(<App />); 5 // Wait for remote module to load 6 await waitFor(() => { 7 expect(screen.getByTestId('catalog')).toBeInTheDocument(); 8 }); 9 }); 10});

Contract Testing#

1// Ensure MFE exposes expected interface 2describe('Catalog MFE Contract', () => { 3 it('exposes ProductList component', async () => { 4 const module = await import('catalog/ProductList'); 5 expect(module.default).toBeDefined(); 6 expect(typeof module.default).toBe('function'); 7 }); 8});

Performance Considerations#

Bundle Size#

1// Aggressive code splitting 2const ProductDetail = lazy(() => 3 import(/* webpackChunkName: "product-detail" */ './ProductDetail') 4); 5 6// Shared dependencies reduce duplication 7shared: { 8 react: { singleton: true }, 9 lodash: { singleton: true }, 10}

Loading Strategy#

1// Progressive loading with skeletons 2function App() { 3 return ( 4 <> 5 {/* Critical MFE loads first */} 6 <Suspense fallback={<HeaderSkeleton />}> 7 <Header /> 8 </Suspense> 9 10 {/* Below-fold MFEs lazy load */} 11 <Suspense fallback={<CatalogSkeleton />}> 12 <Catalog /> 13 </Suspense> 14 </> 15 ); 16}

Deployment#

Independent Deployments#

1# Each MFE has its own pipeline 2# catalog-mfe/.github/workflows/deploy.yml 3name: Deploy Catalog MFE 4 5on: 6 push: 7 branches: [main] 8 9jobs: 10 deploy: 11 steps: 12 - uses: actions/checkout@v4 13 - run: npm ci 14 - run: npm run build 15 - run: aws s3 sync dist/ s3://catalog-mfe/ 16 - run: aws cloudfront create-invalidation --distribution-id ${{ secrets.CF_DIST }}

Version Management#

// remoteEntry.js includes version // Shell can request specific versions remotes: { catalog: `catalog@https://mfe.example.com/catalog/v${CATALOG_VERSION}/remoteEntry.js`, }

Conclusion#

Micro frontends solve organizational scaling problems—enabling independent teams to work on independent codebases with independent deployments. But they add complexity that isn't worth it for smaller teams.

Evaluate honestly: if your frontend team is under 10 people and you don't have clear domain boundaries, a well-structured monolith is probably better. But if you're at the scale where team coordination is the bottleneck, micro frontends can unlock significant velocity.

Start with module federation, establish clear contracts between MFEs, and invest in shared tooling. The architecture complexity is justified by team independence.

Share this article

Help spread the word about Bootspring