Jekyll vs Hugo vs Astro: Which Static Site Generator Should You Use?

Jekyll, Hugo, and Astro all turn your content into fast, static websites, but they feel very different to work with. Here’s how they compare, and which one we’d pick for different kinds of projects.

The short answer

• Choose Jekyll if you want the simplest path to GitHub Pages, write mostly in Markdown, and value a huge library of themes.
• Choose Hugo if you have thousands of pages, want the fastest builds, or prefer a single tool with nothing to install but one binary.
• Choose Astro if you’re comfortable with modern JavaScript and want component-based design with zero JavaScript shipped by default.

Jekyll

Jekyll is the original modern static site generator, written in Ruby and the engine behind GitHub Pages. Content is Markdown with front matter, templates use Liquid, and data lives in simple YAML files.

Strengths: native GitHub Pages support, a mature plugin ecosystem, a gentle learning curve for content-focused sites, and thousands of themes.

Trade-offs: you need a Ruby environment to build locally, and very large sites build more slowly than with Hugo.

Best for: blogs, portfolios, company sites, and documentation hosted on GitHub Pages.

Hugo

Hugo is written in Go and ships as a single binary. It’s famous for speed: large sites with thousands of pages build in seconds. Templates use Go’s template language, and image processing is built in.

Strengths: extremely fast builds, no dependencies to manage, built-in image resizing and asset pipelines, and strong multilingual support.

Trade-offs: Go templates take some getting used to, and complex customizations can feel less intuitive than component-based tools.

Best for: large content sites, documentation, multilingual sites, and teams who want minimal tooling.

Astro

Astro is a JavaScript framework built for content sites. You write components (in Astro’s own syntax, or with React, Vue, or Svelte), and Astro outputs plain HTML with no JavaScript unless a component needs it, an approach it calls “islands”.

Strengths: modern component-based development, zero JavaScript by default for excellent performance, typed content collections, and the freedom to add interactive pieces where you need them.

Trade-offs: you need Node.js and some JavaScript knowledge, and the ecosystem moves quickly, so plan for occasional upgrades.

Best for: developers and designers building custom marketing sites, portfolios, and content sites with some interactivity.

Side by side

	Jekyll	Hugo	Astro
Language	Ruby	Go	JavaScript / TypeScript
Templates	Liquid	Go templates	Components (.astro, React, Vue, Svelte)
Build speed	Good	Fastest	Good
GitHub Pages	Built in	Via GitHub Actions	Via GitHub Actions
Learning curve	Gentle	Moderate	Moderate (if you know JS)
Best for	Blogs, portfolios, business sites	Large and multilingual sites	Custom, component-based sites

Hosting is the same for all three

Whichever you choose, the output is static HTML, CSS, and images, so you can host it for free or almost free on GitHub Pages, Cloudflare Pages, or Netlify, with a CDN, HTTPS, and nothing to patch.

Our take

For most portfolios and small business sites, Jekyll remains the quickest way to launch, especially on GitHub Pages. Browse our Jekyll themes to start today. We’re also building Hugo and Astro themes for teams who prefer those tools. Tell us what you’d like to see.