Find your SSG pairing, verdict, criteria, and the take that fits your brief
24 head-to-head pairings. Every one gives you a hand-curated verdict, which framework wins for which brief, plus 5-7 criteria with the winner per criterion. Built from the same /static-site-generators/ directory data, so the take stays consistent.
SEE THE FULL DIRECTORY →The pairings
Different protagonists, not a like-for-like fight.
Read the comparison →Hugo wins on raw build speed and operational simplicity, single Go binary, no Node toolchain, rebuilds 50,000 pages in seconds.
Read the comparison →Eleventy wins for small-to-medium content sites where a UI framework would be overhead.
Read the comparison →For new projects in 2026, this is barely a comparison, pick Next.
Read the comparison →Astro is the modern answer; Gatsby is the legacy answer.
Read the comparison →Hugo is what Jekyll would be if it were rewritten in 2024.
Read the comparison →Eleventy is the JavaScript-flavoured Jekyll for the modern era.
Read the comparison →Same architectural shape, different UI framework.
Read the comparison →SvelteKit ships smaller bundles for the same UI complexity and the developer experience is leaner.
Read the comparison →Both are excellent docs SSGs, picked by the team's primary UI framework.
Read the comparison →Starlight is the framework-agnostic docs option that finally serves teams not locked into React.
Read the comparison →Hugo wins on raw speed and single-binary simplicity.
Read the comparison →Two modern frameworks at the same maturity tier, doing different jobs.
Read the comparison →Astro for content, Nuxt for application-shape Vue work.
Read the comparison →For new projects in 2026, Astro by a wide margin.
Read the comparison →Different scopes, both Vue-team-blessed.
Read the comparison →Hugo is the established choice with a much bigger community.
Read the comparison →For Python project docs the choice is shape-driven.
Read the comparison →Starlight is the framework-agnostic docs option (Astro), VitePress is the Vue-native one.
Read the comparison →Mintlify is the polished hosted option with vendor lock-in; Docusaurus is the open-source self-hosted default.
Read the comparison →Two mature blog SSGs with overlapping audiences.
Read the comparison →Different scopes within the Python world.
Read the comparison →Same architectural shape (islands), different runtime.
Read the comparison →Not really comparable, TinaCMS is a CMS, Astro is a framework.
Read the comparison →How these comparisons are written
Each comparison is a verdict in two parts. The opening paragraph answers the "which one wins for which brief" question, which framework is the right pick for which kind of project. The criteria table answers the specific decision questions: which builds faster, which is easier to hire for, which scales further, which has a healthier maintenance trajectory.
Where one side genuinely wins, I say so directly. Where it is a tie or depends on team and context, I say that too. The job of the comparison is not to declare a winner; it is to surface the trade-offs cleanly enough that you can match them to your brief without spending two weeks on it.
Star counts and trajectory flags are pulled from the underlying directory at /static-site-generators/, refreshed quarterly, kept honest.
Want the human version of this for your project?
The 30-min call is where the comparison becomes a recommendation for your actual brief, your stack, your migration, your price range. No deck, no qualification screen. By the end, you have the answer you came for.