Updated by Maab Saleem
As web development advances, the way we assemble websites and front ends are also changing. Web applications used to be simple static HTML pages with a few hyperlinks and terrible animations. Today, web applications and websites have become much more complex in the modern era.
New frameworks, libraries, and tools are developed daily and it can be hard to keep up. As a result, many current advancements in web technology are focused on simplifying web development. Some of these advancements include concepts like headless content management systems such as ButterCMS, whose Next.js CMS and Gatsby.js CMS can greatly simplify back-end development.
On the front end, there are also plenty of frameworks helping to simplify development. These include React.js, Angular.js, Vue.js and many more. React is currently one of the more popular front-end JavaScript frameworks.
As its popularity has grown, many new tools have been introduced to simplify the React development process. Two such tools are Next and Gatsby. Both of these frameworks were developed to help ease the connection between the back and front ends. Partnered with the right headless CMS, this workflow can majorly streamline your development process.
But when you compare Gatsby vs Next.js, which is the best open-source React framework? We'll start by looking at each individually.
Next.js is an open-source React framework that is used to build web-based applications. This framework is based on Node.js and Babel, and it integrates with React to develop single-page applications.
Next allows you to lay the foundations for creating an application and focuses on rendering pages server-side. This allows for faster initial page loads and improved SEO.
For those familiar with creating web apps with PHP, you know the process is usually to create some files, write PHP code, then deploy everything. There isn’t a huge need to worry about routing.
Next.js also reduces time to interactivity on a web page, and helps improve SEO. Next.js is also known as a meta-framework for universal applications, the goal of this framework is to allow users to develop web views in JavaScript.
Next.js offers built-in support for static site generation, which reduces the load on the server and improves scalability. It provides automatic code splitting and lazy-loading, which decreases the initial download size. These techniques allow the browser to only load necessary code and assets when they are needed, resulting in faster load times and a better user experience.
Next.js enables a streamlined development experience with its intuitive file-based routing system and built-in support for TypeScript. It also integrates with popular development tools such as ESLint and Prettier, making it easier to maintain code quality and consistency.
While there are many significant benefits that come with using Next.js, there are a few considerations to keep in mind:
While there are many significant benefits that come with using Next.js, there are a few considerations to keep in mind:
Whether you're building a complex web application or a basic website, Next.js offers the tools and features to help you create immersive frontends. Here are some of its many use cases:
Gatsby.js is a free and open-source framework that also integrates with React and helps develop web applications faster. With Gatsby, developers can create fast, optimized, and highly customizable websites that are easy to maintain and scale.
Powered by GraphQL, Gatsby generates static sites. Except, unlike Next, it doesn’t render them on a server. GraphQL allows you to declaratively express your data needs. This is done with queries, which are the representation of the data you need. Gatsby acts as a liaison between your CMS, data systems and your front end, as depicted in the image below.
This makes it a great tool when working with headless CMSs, which are essentially only the back-end.
They help take care of back-end heavy lifting and content management so you can focus on the UI and design.
As a headless CMS, ButterCMS fits naturally with Gatsby and can help make your development process easier. There's also already a plug-in that can further speed up your development process.
Gatsby helps in building sites by pulling in data from almost any source. Using its rich data plugin ecosystem, it can fetch data from many different sources - big databases, third-party APIs, etc. - and bring that data directly to your web pages.
It does this using GraphQL, a technology that provides a complete description of the data by fetching the data on run time to fulfill the queries. It generates progressive web applications by splitting the code out of the box and it only loads critical components so that processing is fast for your website users. GraphQL is a major factor to consider when you're comparing Gatsby vs Next.js to identify which one is the best React framework for your project.
Gatsby.js has a rich plugin library that allows developers to easily add functionality to their website. Gatsby.js plugins can be used to source data, optimize images, generate sitemaps, integrate with payment gateways, add advanced searching features, and more. Developers can also build their own custom plugins.
While Next.js has many outstanding features, Gatsby has plenty of its own that make it a formidable opponent:
Like any other platform, Gatsby also has a few considerations you need to keep in mind if you choose to work with it.
Gatsby.js is a versatile React framework that can serve wide-ranging web development use cases.
Next.js and Gatsby are both feature-rich React frameworks that enable developers to build modern, engaging frontends. In the following sections, we’ll explore some differences between the two:
The most significant difference between Next.js and Gatsby.js is arguably their approach to data fetching. Next.js offers more flexibility with data fetching, allowing for the use of REST, GraphQL, or other mechanisms, depending on your use case. On the other hand, Gatsby.js primarily relies on GraphQL for fetching, loading, and querying data.
In terms of rendering strategies, Next.js provides several options, including Server-Side Rendering (SSR), Static Site Generation (SSG), Client-Side Rendering (CSR), and Incremental Static Regeneration (ISR). While historically Gatsby.js only supported SSG and CSR, the release of Gatsby 4 also introduced support for SSR and Deferred Static Generation (DSG).
Next.js requires a server and database to run, while Gatsby.js generates static HTML files that can be hosted on any static web host or Content Delivery Network (CDN).
With Next.js, the server fetches data and generates HTML for each request, providing more flexibility and making it easier to generate dynamic content. However, this approach requires a server and database to handle requests, which can increase the cost and complexity of hosting and scaling the application.
On the other hand, Gatsby.js generates static HTML files at build time, which can be served directly from a CDN, without the need for a server or database to handle requests. This can significantly reduce hosting costs and improve performance by serving content from a location closer to the user.
Gatsby has a plugin-driven architecture, which simplifies the process of adding features to a project. For example, if you want to parse Markdown files using Remark, a popular JavaScript tool, you can install the gatsby-transformer-remark plugin. Or if you want to deploy your Gatsby site to a S3 bucket, you can use the gatsby-plugin-s3 plugin.
Next.js also offers plugins to enhance its core features, but the range of available plugins is limited. E.g. you can find Next.js plugins for optimized images and serverless functions. Additionally, the Next.js ecosystem is rapidly expanding, with many popular libraries and tools, like Redux and GraphQL having dedicated Next.js integrations.
Moreover, Gatsby.js provides various starter kits that include pre-installed plugins and configuration files for specific use cases, such as e-commerce or blogs. Next.js does not have the same level of starter kits available, although it does have a few popular ones, like Next.js with Tailwind CSS and Next.js with Firebase.
As we saw in the data fetching section, both Gatsby and Next.js support SSG, SSR, and CSR. However, there are some differences in how each technology approaches the generation of static pages on-demand, which is also known as deferred static rendering. Next.js calls its version of the approach, Incremental Static Regeneration (ISR), whereas Gatsby refers to it as Deferred Static Generation (DSG).
DSG defers the building of certain pages until they are first requested by a user. While generating a static site, all pages that have been marked as “deferred” are omitted. However, the Gatsby build snapshot includes all the necessary data for both static and deferred pages, ensuring that the site state is captured in an atomic snapshot.
When the first user requests a deferred page, Gatsby builds that page at runtime, and renders it for the user. Then onwards, the deferred page behaves just like any other static page, i.e. it doesn’t have to be built again.
Next.js’ ISR allows you to generate static pages after you have built your application, without having to rebuild everything. With ISR, you can generate static pages on an as-needed basis. However, one challenge with ISR is that there’s no truly atomic build. Changes are made across multiple builds, which may lead to scenarios where a page on the site may not accurately reflect the current state of the site.
Let’s compare Next.js and Gatsby across the following performance categories:
Gatsby sites are typically faster than Next.js sites. According to the Core Web Vitals (CWV) technology report, as of February 2023, 38% of sites built using Gatsby had good CWV scores, whereas only 28% of Next.js sites achieved the same level of performance. A good CWV score is important because it’s a measure of fast loading times and a positive user experience.
Other findings from the report reveal that Gatsby sites typically load 1-3 seconds faster than Next.js. Gatsby sites also boast better scores for Time-to-First-Byte (TTFB), First Contentful Paint (FCP), and Largest Contentful Paint (LCP).
Both frameworks are SEO-friendly as they allow you to build fast-loading web interfaces that deliver engaging experiences. However, Gatsby has an advantage in the SEO department, as it offers a range of SEO plugins to enhance website optimization and visibility.
By allowing you to serve static pages directly from a CDN, and eliminating the need to have dedicated server infrastructure, Gatsby shrinks your attack surface, and reduces chances of compromise. Contrastingly, Next.js requires dedicated servers and databases, which poses greater risk of sensitive data exposure.
In terms of security features, both frameworks offer built-in support for XSS protection, access control, environment variables, HTTPS, and authentication. But again, owing to its rich plugin library, Gatsby offers more flexibility in adding security controls. E.g. you can use a third-party plugin to encrypt data using cryptographically strong algorithms.
At first glance, these two frameworks may seem very similar. But, when you dig a bit deeper, they end up being quite different. One is built to scale, the other is built for the ease of generating static sites.
Gatsby’s connection with GraphQL allows users to quickly develop static web pages that might not be good at scaling, but are easy to build. For many scenarios, the best choice between Gatsby vs Next.js comes down to the question of scalability.
In contrast, Next.js can require a broader set of technical skills that can slow down development. However, it is still easier than developing your entire React website without some framework. This makes Next.js great for larger-scale projects.
There are plenty of examples of websites that use Gatsby or Next. As you look through these examples you'll probably notice how the sites using Gatsby are, on the front-end side, lightweight and mostly static. The sites built with Next.js however require a little more scale and are definitely more interactive.
CodeSandBox.io is a lightweight platform that empowers development teams to create, share and collaborate for rapid web development. Developers can quickly code prototypes, test ideas, and iterate to create better products.
Clubhouse.io is a project management suite built specifically for software teams. With Clubhouse.io, teams can create tasks as stories, track epics and milestones and maintain greater visibility into their projects.
Impossiblefoods.com is a site that features product descriptions and recipes for plant-based meat products.
Angel.co is a site featuring what is known as “the world’s largest startup community.” The site showcases job opportunities at tech and startup companies. The site is also a place for investors to locate up-and-coming tech companies that may be a good investment.
Coinmarketcap.com is a website to track cryptocurrency prices by market cap. Investors can create a watchlist and signup to receive automated updates on their chosen cryptocurrencies.
Fantasy Football fans will recognize Fantasy.espn.com as the ultimate hub for all things fantasy sports. The site features team news and scores for all fantasy sports leagues.
If you have made it this far, you already know that Next.js and Gatsby cater to slightly different use cases. Both have their pros and cons. Depending on your unique business needs, you may choose one over the other.
Go with Next.js if:
Go with Gatsby if:
There are certain scenarios where Gatsby may not be the right fit as a web development framework:
Here are a few situations in which Next.js may not be the ideal choice.
Even though both frameworks enable you to build fast websites, Gatsby is generally faster than Next.js. According to a comparison conducted by the Gatsby team, Gatsby sites load 1-3 seconds faster than those built using Next.js.
Moreover, Gatsby sites also report higher scores for major website performance metrics, like time-to-interactive, time-to-first-byte, First Contentful Paint, and Largest Contentful Paint. However, depending on the size, complexity, and nature of your site, you may find one faster than the other.
Gatsby will typically perform better for sites with lots of static content, and some dynamic content. Next.js will mostly outperform Gatsby for dynamically rendered sites.
