Grav vs Hugo
| Tagline | Fast, simple, and flexible flat-file CMS with no database required | The world's fastest static website generator built in Go |
| Category | Blogging & CMS | Blogging & CMS |
| Replaces | WordPress.com, Squarespace, Medium | WordPress.com, Squarespace, Medium |
| GitHub stars | 16k | 89k |
| Language | PHP | Go |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 2/5 Easy | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Manual Docker | Manual Docker |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 3 days ago | yesterday |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
Grav
- No built-in multi-user editorial workflow or fine-grained permissions
- E-commerce and membership features require third-party plugins
- Flat-file storage can become slow with thousands of pages
Hugo
- No built-in admin UI; content editing requires direct file editing or a third-party headless CMS
- No dynamic features (comments, forms) out of the box — requires external services
- Learning curve for Go templating syntax can be steep for non-developers
Bottom line
Both are a similar lift to self-host; choose Hugo for the larger community and ecosystem. Hugo has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.