Static Site Generators Compared

The Static Renaissance

Static sites are having a moment. After years of CMS-dominated web development, developers are rediscovering the benefits of pre-rendered HTML: blazing fast load times, minimal server requirements, excellent security, and simple deployment.

The key to modern static sites is the static site generator (SSG) — a tool that takes your content (usually Markdown) and templates, and produces a complete HTML website ready to deploy.

The Contenders

Hugo

Hugo is written in Go and is renowned for its speed. Building a site with thousands of pages takes milliseconds. Hugo uses Go templates, which have a steeper learning curve but offer powerful data manipulation.

Strengths:

• Fastest build times of any SSG
• Single binary, no runtime dependencies
• Rich template functions
• Built-in taxonomies, menus, and multilingual support

Weaknesses:

• Go templates can be confusing for beginners
• Limited plugin ecosystem compared to JavaScript-based alternatives
• Configuration can be verbose

Jekyll

Jekyll is the original modern SSG, written in Ruby and GitHub Pages’ default generator. It has the largest community and the most plugins.

Strengths:

• Massive ecosystem of themes and plugins
• First-class GitHub Pages support
• Liquid templating is easy to learn
• Extensive documentation

Weaknesses:

• Slow build times for large sites
• Requires Ruby runtime
• Configuration through _config.yml can become unwieldy

Eleventy (11ty)

Eleventy is a simpler, more flexible alternative written in JavaScript. It supports multiple template languages and has a gentle learning curve.

Strengths:

• Supports 10+ template languages
• Excellent flexibility and data cascade
• Small, focused API
• Great for learning SSG concepts

Weaknesses:

• No built-in development server (uses BrowserSync)
• Smaller ecosystem than Hugo or Jekyll
• Configuration in JavaScript can be complex for advanced use cases

Astro

Astro is the newest contender, taking a different approach with its “island architecture.” It lets you use React, Vue, Svelte, and other frameworks on a per-component basis while shipping zero JavaScript by default.

Strengths:

• Ship zero JS by default
• Use any UI framework
• Excellent performance out of the box
• Growing ecosystem

Weaknesses:

• Newer, smaller community
• Heavier build times than Hugo
• More complex mental model with island architecture

Choosing an SSG

The best SSG depends on your priorities:

• Speed matters most → Hugo
• GitHub Pages integration → Jekyll
• Flexibility and learning → Eleventy
• Framework components → Astro
• Team knows JavaScript → Eleventy or Astro
• Team knows Go → Hugo
• Team knows Ruby → Jekyll

Performance Comparison

For a typical blog with 100 posts:

These numbers vary by configuration and content, but the relative performance characteristics are consistent.

Conclusion

Every SSG has its place. Hugo is the performance champion, Jekyll has the ecosystem, Eleventy offers flexibility, and Astro brings modern component architecture to static sites. The best choice is the one that fits your team’s skills and project’s needs.