Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Hexo

351
384
+ 1
70
Hugo

1.3K
1.2K
+ 1
206
Jekyll

1.9K
1.4K
+ 1
230

Hexo vs Hugo vs Jekyll: What are the differences?

Introduction

Hexo, Hugo, and Jekyll are static site generators, allowing developers to build static websites with ease. While they share common features, there are several key differences that set them apart. This Markdown code provides a concise overview of the main distinctions between Hexo, Hugo, and Jekyll for website developers.

  1. Template Language: Hexo and Jekyll both utilize Liquid as their templating language, allowing users to generate dynamic content. On the other hand, Hugo employs its own template language called Go, which may require users to learn a new syntax. Therefore, developers with existing Liquid knowledge might prefer Hexo or Jekyll for easier adaptation.

  2. Performance: Hugo boasts itself as one of the fastest static site generators, providing quick build times even for large websites. Hexo and Jekyll, while also being efficient, might not match the exceptional speed of Hugo's rendering process. For developers prioritizing performance, Hugo could be the optimal choice.

  3. Ease of Use: Jekyll, being the oldest and most widely used static site generator, offers extensive documentation and a large community for support. Hexo, while not as established as Jekyll, provides user-friendly interfaces for quick setup and customization. Hugo, although powerful, has a steeper learning curve due to its unique architecture, making it less beginner-friendly compared to Hexo and Jekyll.

  4. Multilingual Support: Jekyll has built-in multilingual support, allowing developers to efficiently create websites in multiple languages. While Hexo and Hugo also provide multilingual capabilities, they may require additional plugins or configuration. For projects requiring robust multilingual features out-of-the-box, Jekyll is a reliable choice.

  5. Extensibility and Plugins: Hexo, Jekyll, and Hugo all offer plugins and extensions that extend their functionality and allow developers to customize their websites. Jekyll boasts an extensive library of plugins due to its longstanding community support. Hexo offers a wide range of plugins but may require additional installation steps. Hugo, being built around a single binary, has a more streamlined approach to plugins, which simplifies their usage.

  6. Documentation: Jekyll has comprehensive documentation, reinforced by its large community, making it easy for developers to find answers to their questions. Hexo and Hugo also provide adequate documentation, but the depth and breadth of Jekyll's resources give it an advantage in terms of support and troubleshooting.

In Summary, Hexo, Hugo, and Jekyll are static site generators offering different advantages: - Hexo emphasizes ease of use and user-friendly interfaces. - Hugo prioritizes exceptional performance and rendering speed. - Jekyll boasts extensive documentation and a large community for support. - For multilingual projects, Jekyll provides built-in support, while Hexo and Hugo may require additional configuration. - Each generator offers plugin and extension capabilities, with Jekyll having the most extensive library of plugins. - Hugo utilizes its own template language, which might necessitate learning a new syntax.

Advice on Hexo, Hugo, and Jekyll
Needs advice
on
GatsbyGatsbyHugoHugo
and
Next.jsNext.js
in

Hi everyone, I'm trying to decide which front-end tool, that will likely use server-side rendering (SSR), in hopes it'll be faster. The end-user will upload a document and they see text output on their screen (like SaaS or microservice). I read that Gatsby can also do SSR. Also want to add a headless CMS that is easy to use.

Backend is in Go. Open to ideas. Thank you.

See more
Replies (2)
Vishal Gupta
Senior Architect at Mindtree Ltd · | 3 upvotes · 27.2K views
Recommends
on
GatsbyGatsbyNext.jsNext.js

If your purpose is plain simply to upload a file which can handle by backend service than Gatsby is good enough assuming you have other content pages which will benefit from faster page loads for those Headless CMS driven pages. But if you have more logical/functional aspects like deciding content/personalization at server side of web application than choose NextJS.

See more
Leonard Daume
CTO - Doing the right things right at QYRAGY GmbH · | 2 upvotes · 5.8K views
Recommends
on
AstroAstroNext.jsNext.js

I have experience with Hugo and Next.js, but not with Gatsby. I would go with Next.js. However, I used Astro for my last project, so I would recommend Astro. Astro is much faster and you can use almost any frontend framework if you need to.

See more
Decisions about Hexo, Hugo, and Jekyll
Manuel Feller
Frontend Engineer at BI X · | 4 upvotes · 163.8K views

As a Frontend Developer I wanted something simple to generate static websites with technology I am familiar with. GatsbyJS was in the stack I am familiar with, does not need any other languages / package managers and allows quick content deployment in pure HTML or Markdown (what you prefer for a project). It also does not require you to understand a theming engine if you need a custom design.

See more
Get Advice from developers at your company using StackShare Enterprise. Sign up for StackShare Enterprise.
Learn More
Pros of Hexo
Pros of Hugo
Pros of Jekyll
  • 18
    Ease of deployment
  • 13
    Uses NodeJS and npm
  • 12
    Easy GitHub Pages publishing
  • 10
    Powerful templating
  • 7
    Useful tools and plugins
  • 4
    Easy intergrating with js
  • 3
    Open source
  • 3
    Blazing Fast
  • 47
    Lightning fast
  • 29
    Single Executable
  • 26
    Easy setup
  • 24
    Great development community
  • 23
    Open source
  • 13
    Write in golang
  • 8
    Not HTML only - JSON, RSS
  • 8
    Hacker mindset
  • 7
    LiveReload built in
  • 4
    Gitlab pages integration
  • 4
    Easy to customize themes
  • 4
    Very fast builds
  • 3
    Well documented
  • 3
    Fast builds
  • 3
    Easy to learn
  • 74
    Github pages integration
  • 54
    Open source
  • 37
    It's slick, customisable and hackerish
  • 24
    Easy to deploy
  • 23
    Straightforward cms for the hacker mindset
  • 7
    Gitlab pages integration
  • 5
    Best for blogging
  • 2
    Low maintenance
  • 2
    Easy to integrate localization
  • 1
    Huge plugins ecosystem
  • 1
    Authoring freedom and simplicity

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Hexo
Cons of Hugo
Cons of Jekyll
    Be the first to leave a con
    • 4
      No Plugins/Extensions
    • 2
      Template syntax not friendly
    • 1
      Quick builds
    • 4
      Build time increases exponentially as site grows
    • 2
      Lack of developments lately
    • 1
      Og doesn't work with postings dynamically

    Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions