Static Site Generators (SSGs) have become increasingly popular among web developers for their simplicity, speed, and security. Having personally tested and explored various SSGs to build my blog, I would like to share my experiences and feedback on each one. Each SSG has its strengths and weaknesses, and finding the right fit for your project is crucial. In this blog post, I will provide an honest overview of the SSGs I’ve tested, along with their pros and cons.

I was searching for a suitable SSG to build my blog, aiming to minimize costs and simplify website maintenance. My primary requirements included creating a visually appealing, multilanguage website with interactive JavaScript elements.

Jekyll: A Classic Choice

Jekyll, established in 2013, was one of the earliest and most well-known SSGs. It is the default choice for GitHub Pages, offering simplicity and ease of use. Being built in Ruby, it comes with a plethora of themes. However, users have reported performance issues, and updating themes can be challenging. Overall, Jekyll is a reliable choice but not the most modern solution.

Next: Not Exactly a Static Site Generator

Next, a React/JavaScript framework, claims to be a static site generator, but it’s essential to note that it is primarily designed for server-side rendering (SSR). While it does support static site generation (2023), certain critical features like i18n and next/Image are not available. Moreover, the strong ties with Vercel’s cloud services may discourage those seeking independence from relying on third-party services.

Gatsby: The ReactJS static site generator

Gatsby is a popular choice among developers due to its elegant architecture and extensive plugin ecosystem. However, some users have reported performance issues, especially with larger sites. Additionally, integrating internationalization (i18n) can be challenging as Gatsby lacks an official plugin for it.

Eleventy: A simple SSG

Eleventy is a versatile SSG that offers great flexibility. However, it doesn’t support ECMAScript modules (esm), which could limit its usability for those wanting to work with tools like MermaidJS. Despite this drawback, Eleventy remains a strong contender for simpler projects.

Nuxt: VueJS-Powered but Bug-Prone

Nuxt, built on VueJS, offers an excellent developer experience, especially with VueJS enthusiasts. However, during my testing, version 3 had several bugs (2022), which hindered my experience. As a result, I was unable to fully utilize Nuxt for my project. But the tool looks greats !

Hugo: The Speedy and Feature-Rich Champion

Hugo, a static site generator written in Go, stood out as an excellent choice during my testing. Its philosophy of being “one big binary” ensures it comes with an extensive set of features, including LiveReload, RSS, image resizing, Markdown support, and table of contents. Being incredibly fast due to its Go implementation, Hugo offers an impressive development experience. However, its lack of extensibility may be a drawback for some developers who desire more customization.

AstroJS: The Ultimate Solution

AstroJS is a promising option that offers a balance between content-centric and rich user interface capabilities. As a JavaScript framework, it allows developers to build dynamic and feature-rich interfaces while still enjoying the benefits of static site generation. With Astro 2, build times have significantly improved, addressing one of its earlier drawbacks.


After extensive testing and evaluation, I found that each static site generator has its strengths and weaknesses. While Jekyll and Gatsby are popular choices, their performance may not suit every project. Next and Nuxt offer excellent developer experiences but come with certain limitations. Eleventy is flexible but lacks esm module support, which could be a dealbreaker for some.

Ultimately, Hugo impressed me with its speed and feature-rich design, making it my top recommendation for most projects. However, if you need more control over your website and prefer using a JavaScript framework, AstroJS is a worthy contender, especially with its improved build times.

Choosing the right static site generator depends on your specific project needs and preferences, so I encourage you to explore each option to find the perfect fit for your development workflow.

Recommended articles