vs
Next.js vs Astro
Next.js vs Astro for marketing websites
Both are free, open-source frameworks. Astro is built for content sites that ship little JavaScript; Next.js is built for React apps that also serve pages. Facts as of 29 October 2026.
Updated October 2026 · Written by Shaheer Malik, who builds in Next.js and Framer
Quick answer
Astro is the lighter choice for a content-heavy marketing site: it ships very little JavaScript by default and works with any UI library. Next.js is the better choice when the site sits alongside a React app, needs logins or shares components with the product. Both are free and open source.
Next.js and Astro are both free, open-source frameworks that can build excellent marketing sites. Astro is content-first: pages are HTML by default, with interactive islands only where needed. Next.js is React-first: a full application framework that also renders marketing pages.
On 29 October 2026, the latest Next.js release was 16.4, from 6 October 2026, and Astro 7.4 had shipped on 15 October 2026. Astro joined Cloudflare in January 2026 and stays platform-agnostic; Vercel, the company behind Next.js, offers a free Hobby plan for personal, non-commercial use and Pro at $20 per developer seat.
| Dimension |  Next.js |  Astro |
|---|---|---|
| Built for | React applications that also serve pages | Content-focused sites |
| JavaScript shipped | React runtime on interactive pages | Very little by default |
| UI library | React | Any: React, Vue, Svelte or none |
| Logins, data and APIs | Built in: server components, route handlers | Possible with server routes and adapters |
| Sharing code with a React product | Natural | Possible through React islands |
| Hosting | Vercel or any Node host; static export available | Any host, including free static plans |
| Cost | Free and open source | Free and open source |
Choose Next.js if…
- Your product is a React app and the site should share its components
- Parts of the site need logins, data or APIs
- One team should own one codebase for site and app
- You plan to grow the site into an application
Choose Astro if…
- The site is mostly content: pages, docs, a blog
- You want the least JavaScript possible
- Your team uses Vue, Svelte or plain HTML, not only React
- You want simple static hosting
The honest verdict
For a pure marketing or content site, Astro is usually lighter and simpler. When the marketing site lives next to a React product, Next.js keeps one stack, one set of components and room to add logged-in features.
I build in Next.js for sites that are becoming products, and in Framer when a marketing team should own the site without code.
Need a Next.js build? Next.js development covers my fixed-price sprints.
Common questions
Next.js vs Astro, answered
For content pages, Astro usually ships less JavaScript by default, which helps load speed. A carefully built Next.js site can be just as fast; the content, images and scripts you add matter more.
Yes. Astro supports React and other UI libraries as islands, loading their JavaScript only where a component needs it.
If the product is a React app, Next.js keeps the site and the product on one stack. If the site is only marketing and a developer runs it, Astro is lighter. If marketers run it, consider Framer.
Yes, both are open source. You pay for hosting, which can be free on static plans or on Vercel's Hobby plan for personal, non-commercial projects.
Work with me
Want it built, not just compared?
I ship production sites and product UI in Next.js and Astro — design and code under one roof.
- Fixed price from $700 — no hourly surprises
- Design, build and deploy handled end to end
- 75+ projects shipped · 4.93 avg rating
More comparisons