Two javascript frameworks compared: Astro vs Gatsby with some futuristic background

10 August 2023

Astro vs Gatsby

Irelia Codeheart, Senior Developer

Understanding Astro vs Gatsby: A Performance Comparison

The following article of the caisy blog provides an in-depth comparison of the frameworks Astro and Gatsby. This should help developers make an informed decision and choose the right toolkit for their next project.

Astro and Gatsby: Bundle sizes and loading speeds

In the world of front-end development, the size of JavaScript bundles and loading speeds can make or break a website's user experience. Here, Astro shines with its innovative approach of delivering zero JavaScript by default, which results in significantly smaller bundle sizes and speedier load times. Although Gatsby also promotes high site performance, it still requires runtime JavaScript, which increases initial load times.

Server-side rendering in Astro and Gatsby

Both Astro and Gatsby offer server-side rendering (SSR) capabilities which enable them to deliver high-performing, SEO-friendly websites. In the case of Astro, it doesn't use React by default but can easily integrate with it. Comparatively, Gatsby is built around React and takes it one step further: Going beyond just creating static pages and providing support for SSR.

Astro uses Snowpack for bundling its modules, resulting in faster builds, while Gatsby leverages webpack. It's important to note that in any development project, choosing the right bundler can play a significant role in enhancing performance and developer experience.

Comparing SEO performance: Astro and Gatsby

Talking about SEO optimization, Astro, Gatsby, and even Next.js all come with built-in SSG and crawler-friendliness. Astro’s minimalist use of JavaScript makes it the most crawler-friendly. Gatsby and Next.js get on the field when it comes to image optimization and link pre-fetching. However, do remember that the ultimate SEO performance, in the end, depends mostly on the website content and the skills of the web developer.

Astro vs Gatsby: Better suited for interactivity or non-interactive sites?

Astro is often the go-to choice for non-interactive websites due to its zero-JavaScript nature, providing a quick, minimalist experience. On the other hand, Gatsby, which is grounded in React, is typically preferred for websites requiring more interactivity. However, both of them embody SSR and SSG capabilities, offering a great web development framework for developers to build upon.

In conclusion, the choice between Astro and Gatsby is subjective and depends largely on the specific requirements of the project and the developer's preferences.

Headless CMS for developers

Your terms, your stack. Experience unmatched speed and flexibility with caisy - the headless CMS you've been dreaming of.

A graphic showing caisy's benefits for developers, including frameworks and features.

Diving Deep into the Features: Astro and Gatsby

In this section, we dive deep into the features of Astro and Gatsby, examining their template languages, module bundlers, unique features, and plugin ecosystems, as well as conducting a case study on's use of both frameworks.

Astro vs Gatsby: Template Languages and Module Bundlers

Astro.js supports multiple template languages, thus providing a flexible development environment. It's designed to work seamlessly with various front-end frameworks such as Vue or Svelte. On the other hand, Gatsby is built around React.js and primarily uses JSX (JavaScript XML).

It's interesting to note that Astro uses Snowpack as its built-in module bundler, allowing for faster build times and a dev server that starts up instantly. Gatsby, on the other hand, relies on webpack as its module bundler known for its vast plugin ecosystem and reliability.

// Gatsby using JSX
export default function Home() {
  return <div>Hello world!</div>

// Astro using JSX-like syntax
// JavaScript/TypeScript. Note the triple hyphen enclosing this.
<div>Hello world!</div> // 🎉 no JavaScript needed

Exploring Unique Features: Astro vs Gatsby

Gatsby goes a step further than Astro by not only providing support for static site generation (SSG), but also server-side rendering (SSR). This makes Gatsby ideal for applications that require interactivity.

Conversely, Astro provides an option to disable runtime JavaScript, allowing for lightweight websites that load with astonishing speed. Astro really shines when it comes to achieving a smaller bundle size, thanks to partial hydration.

// Astro component with disabled runtime JavaScript
<script astro={{ "client:load": false }}></script>

Comparison of Astro and Gatsby's Plugin Ecosystems

When it comes to the plugin ecosystem, Gatsby excels with an established network of plugins managing everything from image optimization to sourcing from APIs and CMSs.

Astro's ecosystem of plugins is still in development.

// Gatsby plugin configuration
module.exports = {
  plugins: [

However, it's worth noting that although Gatsby has a larger plugin quantity, Astro provides a flexible scripting environment that allows for more developer freedom.

Case Study: uses both Astro and Gatsby

According to information derived, migrated a Gatsby project to Astro. Both platforms have similarities in syntax and serve similar purposes, however, Astro was preferred for its lean builds and performance.

Astro delivers applications with smaller bundle sizes and faster loading times. However, as Astro was in its experimental stage at the time, there were issues with server restarts and with its Image component.

As a developer, it's important to remember that the choice between Astro and Gatsby depends on specific project requirements.

Astro vs Gatsby: Navigating the Learning Curve

In this section, we're going to take an in-depth look at the learning curve associated with Astro and Gatsby. Given the technical similarities and differences between these two frameworks, the experience of migrating from one to the other, and general ease of use, it is of great importance to understand which one might be more accessible for beginners and provide a smoother learning experience.

Is Astro more beginner-friendly than Gatsby?

Based on a direct comparison between Astro.js and Gatsby, both platforms possess their unique characteristics, which makes it challenging to weigh which one is more beginner-friendly.

Astro.js shines with its diverse range of usable frameworks such as Vue or Svelte, thus making it a viable option if you are already familiar with these frameworks. Even though it does not have as many content management system (CMS) plugins as Gatsby, Astro.js and Gatsby can both fetch data from APIs during build time using Node.js. Note: Gatsby is primarily focused on React and has a rich ecosystem built around it.

Despite being new in the market, Astro has drawn significant attention on account of its flexibility, developer freedom, and the ability to support sites with minimal JavaScript. However, one can argue that Gatsby’s well-established ecosystem, advanced image optimization, and solid support for sites requiring heavy interactivity makes it a solid option for beginners who are already familiar with JavaScript and React.

Gatsby vs Astro: Which has a smoother learning curve?

When evaluating the learning curve, it’s essential to consider the technology a developer is already familiar with, as this can significantly impact the learning process.

Based on the information gathered, both Astro.js and Gatsby have their own sets of pros and cons. For instance, Astro.js offers more developer freedom and flexibility, making it suitable for sites with minimal JavaScript or when using frameworks other than React. On the other hand, Gatsby's larger ecosystem built around React can provide a comprehensive ecosystem for developers already comfortable with React.

Moreover, Gatsby's optimized image handling, automatic sitemap generation, and great SEO support also contribute to making it an appealing choice. However, it is also worth noting that Astro.js supports similar features. Therefore, the learning curve's smoothness can largely depend on the developer's familiarity and comfort with the frameworks’ underlying technologies.

Challenges of migrating a Gatsby site to Astro: A real-world experience

Switching from one framework to another is never a straightforward process. Anecdotal evidence suggests challenges such as dealing with Tailwind classes, dev server restarts, and the still experimental nature of Astro's Image component when migrating a site from Gatsby to Astro.

This is compounded by the fact that Astro is still an early beta static site generator, so some features may not yet be stable. Therefore, if you're considering transitioning from Gatsby to Astro, these potential pain points are worth considering.

To sum up, both Astro and Gatsby have their own unique selling points and potential roadblocks. The selection between the two, however, largely depends upon the existing knowledge base, the requirements of your project, and your willingness to engage with possibly unfamiliar technological territories.

Astro and Gatsby in Practice: Real-world Experiences

Case study: Building an app with Astro, Gatsby, and Next.js

When comparing building applications with Astro, Gatsby, and Next.js, it becomes immediately apparent that each of these tools has its own strengths. As collected from the user's perspectives available online, we noticed that Gatsby boosts from the established ecosystem of React and thus opens up several beneficial avenues like a strong plugin community and smooth experience handling static pages.

Astro, an experimental newcomer, while does not offer a robust ecosystem as Gatsby yet, provides more developer freedom when it comes to integrating different frontend frameworks, thereby becoming a popular choice for developers who regularly play around with multiple JavaScript frameworks.

Next.js, in comparison, has been termed as a "multi-talent framework" enabling various functionalities like server-side rendering, static site generation and API routes, thereby making it versatile for a wide range of projects.

Case study: Migrating a Gatsby site to Astro for improved performance

Concerning migration from a Gatsby website to Astro, some discussions online highlight potential issues, such as the unavailability of API data fetching, lack of compatibility with Tailwind CSS, and a not fully matured Image component. However, Astro shines in aspects of performance, delivering significantly smaller bundle sizes by default.

Worth considering is that Astro is quite new to the club. While it's making strides in static site generation, its experimental nature might prompt developers to hesitate before using Astro in a production environment.

The impact of Astro and Gatsby on SEO: Case studies

When it comes to SEO capabilities, both Gatsby and Astro exhibit excellent performance. They have the ability to generate static sites that are SEO-friendly. According to a comparison on Vaihe, Astro, Gatsby, and even Next.js all demonstrate the capability to generate sitemaps and achieve high scores on Google's Lighthouse performance metric.

It's evident that Astro better suits non-interactive sites whereas Gatsby - along with Next.js - better caters the needs of interactive websites. However, irrespective of the differences, both Gatsby and Astro are well-equipped to fulfill SEO requirements according to our collected feedbacks.

Astro vs Gatsby: The Verdict of the Developer Community

This section delves into the developer perspective on the Astro vs Gatsby debate. The community is divided into various threads, reviews, and ongoing discussions have some key insights to provide.

Community views on Astro vs Gatsby: Recent Discussions

In recent discussions amongst developers, it's observable that Gatsby enjoys a distinct advantage in terms of popularity due to its longer existence and a larger community. Meanwhile, Astro's less steep learning curve and the innovative approach towards the rendering process gets commendable attention.

By the way: Caisy offers a special Starter Template for creating a blog with Astro and caisy as headless CMS.

In performance aspects, it's noted from developer discussions that Astro, with its no-JavaScript approach, produces faster, SEO-friendly websites, stressing the output size. On the other hand, Gatsby, with the power of GraphQL and React, offers a more robust and feature-rich development environment.

Key Takeaways from Debates and Reviews

From various debates and reviews, the following key points have emerged as major comparisons:

  • Performance: Astro has a slight edge with its zero-JavaScript strategy making the output considerably smaller and faster.

  • Learning Curve: Astro, being a new entrant and having a streamlined development process, has less steep learning curve compared to Gatsby.

  • Community and Ecosystem: Gatsby boasts of a powerful community with many plugins and integrations, making it a well-established player.

  • Development Environment: While Astro concentrates on being lean and focus on essential features, Gatsby offers comprehensive resources with GraphQL and React backing it.

These points, while providing a general overview, may change as both the platforms continue to evolve depending on the exact project requirements.

Amplifying Community Voices: What Developers are Saying About Astro and Gatsby

Astro's lean and focused approach has found favor with developers who prioritize performance and minimalism. Several comments highlight the performance benefits of Astro's front-end only JavaScript strategy, and the ease of deploying static files on CDNs.

Contrarily, Gatsby’s rich feature set, strong community support and broad ecosystem of plugins get positive vibe from developers. The React-centered methodology of Gatsby, its excellent documentation and the GraphQL flexibility are repeatedly mentioned with appreciation across discussion platforms.

Remember, the choice between Astro and Gatsby is largely subjective and project-specific. Both offers unique strengths and one needs to evaluate them in the context of requirements, project complexity, and familiarity with the platforms.

Making the Choice: Astro or Gatsby?

As developers, it’s crucial to choose the right tools for our projects, especially when it comes to our framework. In this section, we’ll dive further into the comparison of Astro vs Gatsby, providing an informed perspective on which is the best for you.

Astro vs Gatsby: Considering Your Project Requirements

In terms of feature set, both Astro and Gatsby have significant capabilities. They both support static site generation (SSG) and server-side rendering (SSR), fetch data from APIs, and can utilize Node.js. For individual project requirements, you'll need to consider the specifics. For instance, Astro.js supports frameworks other than React, like Vue and Svelte. However, Gatsby has more source plugins for CMSs. Both frameworks are SEO-friendly and provide great hosting options, as well as support for TypeScript, Tailwind, SCSS, and CSS modules.

Balancing Performance and Ease of Use: Astro and Gatsby

Both Astro and Gatsby balance performance and ease-of-use, but they target these areas differently. Astro.js allows for more developer freedom and lightweight sites without JavaScript, fitting when developing non-interactive or minimally-interactive sites. Gatsby, on the other hand, is ideal for interactivity and builds on the extensive React ecosystem, making it more comfortable for developers familiar with React.

Looking Ahead: The Future of Astro and Gatsby

As for the future, both Astro and Gatsby are progressively improving and evolving. While Astro is relatively new and gaining traction, Gatsby's mature react-based infrastructure continues to develop and has built an extensive community around it.

Final Thoughts: The Pros and Cons of Astro and Gatsby

It's crucial to remember that there's no such thing as a one-size-fits-all solution. Astro excels in bundle sizes and component loading options, offering flexibility in development. However, Gatsby has a larger community and a more prevalent plugin support system. The end choice ultimately depends on your project needs as both frameworks cater to different types of projects and have their own unique strengths.

To sum up, both Astro and Gatsby offer impressive features and developer experiences. They provide high-quality, high-performing, SEO-friendly sites - the choice ultimately depends on your project requirements and personal preference as a developer.

With that said, let's introduce caisy, a high-performing Headless CMS that can enhance either Astro or Gatsby applications. Caisy is a unique tool, perfect for frontend developers and agencies, that provides a fast and user-friendly interface. The flexible multi-tenancy system nested inside caisy could streamline your project management, while its powerful GraphQL API beautifully aligns with the data-fetching capabilities of both Astro and Gatsby. Moreover, the pricing tiers and partnership opportunities offered by caisy make it a compelling choice for projects of all sizes. Curious? Learn more about how caisy empowers developers.

So, for developers who are taking advantage of the powerful capabilities offered by Astro and Gatsby and punctually seek efficiency and flexibility in their tools, caisy proves to be an ideal companion. Leveraging the power of caisy in your Astro or Gatsby application can help provide a comprehensive solution that allows for creativity, efficiency, and scalability. So why not sign up for a free account today and see how caisy can help augment your development workflow?

Focus on Your Code
Let caisy Handle the Content.