Static site generators (SSGs) have carved out a loyal following among developers who want speed, simplicity, and security. In 2025, that trend continues—with more developers building lightning-fast, secure websites using tools like Eleventy, Hugo, and Jekyll. Each of these generators has stood the test of time, offering unique strengths that make them appealing to different types of users. So if you’re currently deciding which SSG to bet on for your next project, this deep dive into Eleventy vs Hugo vs Jekyll: comparing static site generators in 2025 will give you everything you need to make a confident choice.
Why Static Site Generators Still Matter in 2025
Before we jump into comparing Eleventy, Hugo, and Jekyll, let’s talk about why SSGs continue to thrive despite the rise of powerful JavaScript frameworks and headless CMS platforms.
- Performance: No runtime = no delays. Static sites are prebuilt and served via CDN, leading to incredibly fast load times.
- Security: No databases or server-side logic to exploit. Attack surfaces are minimal.
- Simplicity: For content-focused sites, you don’t need a full-blown CMS or backend stack.
- Portability: You can host your site on almost any platform—from GitHub Pages to Netlify or Vercel.
- Developer Experience: Markdown, templating languages, version control—these fit naturally into modern dev workflows.
Now let’s unpack how Eleventy, Hugo, and Jekyll stack up against one another across several critical categories.
Eleventy vs Hugo vs Jekyll: Comparing Static Site Generators in 2025
When you’re evaluating these tools, you’re probably asking: which one is the fastest? Which one is easiest to work with? Which one has the most flexibility? Let’s break it down.
1. Setup and Learning Curve
Jekyll has been around the longest (since 2008) and became popular because of its tight integration with GitHub Pages. However, it relies on Ruby, which isn’t a favorite for many JavaScript or general-purpose developers. Installing Ruby and its dependencies (like Bundler) can be annoying if you’re not already in that ecosystem.
Eleventy (or 11ty) is the most approachable for JavaScript developers. It doesn’t require a JavaScript framework or build process to start. Just install via npm and you’re up and running. Plus, it doesn’t lock you into a single templating language—you can choose from Liquid, Nunjucks, Pug, Markdown, and others.
Hugo stands out for being written in Go and offering a single binary. No dependencies. Just download the binary, drop in your content, and build. This makes it incredibly simple to install and lightning-fast to execute.
Winner for ease of setup: Hugo
Winner for ease of learning (especially for JS devs): Eleventy
2. Build Speed
Here’s where Hugo absolutely demolishes the competition. It’s known for being one of the fastest static site generators, often compiling thousands of pages in milliseconds. Eleventy is quite fast too, especially for medium-sized projects. Jekyll, on the other hand, is the slowest among the three, especially on large sites with many collections or custom logic.
| Generator | Build Time (1000 pages) |
|---|---|
| Hugo | ~0.3 seconds |
| Eleventy | ~2 seconds |
| Jekyll | ~8–10 seconds |
Winner for speed: Hugo
3. Flexibility and Customization
Eleventy gives you full control over your content and structure. You can use multiple templating languages in the same project, define your own directory structure, and write custom shortcodes or filters in JavaScript. It’s ideal for developers who want fine-grained control without unnecessary abstraction.
Hugo is powerful but opinionated. You have to work within its structure—like the strict organization of content, layouts, and partials. Its templating syntax is Go-based, which is fast but not very intuitive for newcomers.
Jekyll is less flexible compared to the others. You’re mostly working with Liquid templates, and customizing things often requires plugins—which can be a pain to maintain or get working on platforms like GitHub Pages.
Winner for customization: Eleventy
4. Content Management
If you’re just working with Markdown and text files, all three tools are solid. But when it comes to integrating headless CMS options (like Sanity, Contentful, or Netlify CMS), Eleventy and Hugo both shine. Their ecosystems make it easier to connect APIs or process external data at build time. Jekyll can do it too, but again, it’s slower and the plugin landscape is more dated.
Also, consider content workflows: both Hugo and Eleventy play nicely with Git-based CMS platforms, making them better options for teams that want to empower non-dev content editors.
Winner for headless CMS integration: Tie between Hugo and Eleventy
5. Community and Ecosystem
In 2025, all three have thriving communities, but they differ in energy and innovation.
- Jekyll’s community is still active, but less so than it was five years ago. It’s now seen more as a “legacy” tool.
- Eleventy has a very enthusiastic developer base, including contributors who push accessibility, performance, and modern workflows.
- Hugo’s community is consistent and pragmatic. Lots of themes, plugins, and community support via forums and GitHub.
| Generator | GitHub Stars (2025) | Contributors | Release Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hugo | 75K+ | 850+ | Very frequent |
| Eleventy | 18K+ | 250+ | Frequent |
| Jekyll | 45K+ | 500+ | Infrequent |
Winner for future energy: Eleventy
Winner for stability and maturity: Hugo
Still solid but aging: Jekyll
6. Use Cases and Who Should Use What
If you’re still wondering where each shines, here’s a quick cheat sheet:
| Use Case | Best Tool |
|---|---|
| Personal blog hosted on GitHub Pages | Jekyll |
| Large corporate documentation site | Hugo |
| Developer portfolio or blog | Eleventy |
| Content-driven marketing site with custom design | Eleventy |
| Massive multilingual site | Hugo |
| Quick MVP with minimal setup | Hugo |
7. Templating Language and Developer Ergonomics
Let’s face it: templating languages can make or break the development experience.
- Jekyll uses Liquid, which is readable but limiting in logic.
- Eleventy lets you use Nunjucks, Liquid, Pug, EJS, Handlebars, etc. Choose your weapon.
- Hugo uses Go templates—very fast, but less intuitive.
In 2025, with more devs coming from JavaScript backgrounds, Eleventy’s flexibility is a big plus.
Winner for dev comfort: Eleventy
8. Hosting and Deployment
All three SSGs are easy to host.
- Jekyll integrates natively with GitHub Pages.
- Eleventy and Hugo are both perfect for Netlify, Vercel, or any other static hosting service.
You can also automate deployments using CI/CD pipelines from GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, or Bitbucket.
Winner: Tie
Conclusion: Which One Should You Pick in 2025?
If you’re comparing Eleventy vs Hugo vs Jekyll in 2025, the choice really comes down to your priorities.
- Choose Eleventy if you want flexibility, modern tooling, and love working in JavaScript.
- Choose Hugo if you need blistering speed and want to build large, multilingual, content-heavy sites.
- Choose Jekyll if you’re already working on GitHub Pages and want the simplest path with fewer dependencies.
Each generator is battle-tested. What’s changed in 2025 is that developers expect more performance, more customization, and a smoother workflow. Eleventy is rapidly becoming the “developer’s favorite,” Hugo is the king of performance, and Jekyll, while still solid, is slowly becoming a classic.
Whichever tool you pick, just know: you’re building on a foundation that prioritizes performance, simplicity, and future-proof delivery.
FAQs
1. Is Eleventy better than Hugo in 2025?
It depends—Eleventy is more flexible for developers, while Hugo is faster and better for massive sites.
2. Can I use Eleventy or Hugo on GitHub Pages?
You can, but GitHub Pages only has native support for Jekyll. For Eleventy and Hugo, you’ll need a CI/CD workflow.
3. Is Jekyll still worth learning in 2025?
Yes, especially if you’re working on legacy projects or using GitHub Pages, but it’s no longer the most innovative choice.
4. Which static site generator is fastest in 2025?
Hugo remains the fastest by far thanks to its Go-based engine.
5. Can I migrate from Jekyll to Eleventy easily?
Somewhat. Both use Markdown and support similar structures, but templating and build tools differ, so you’ll need to refactor templates.
