head to head · open source

hugo vs studiocms

hugo has 89,854 GitHub stars, 8,381 forks, 235 open issues and last shipped yesterday. studiocms has 833 stars, 59 forks, 20 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. hugo leads on adoption by 10,687% (89,854 vs 833 stars). hugo is written in Go under Apache-2.0; studiocms is written in TypeScript under MIT. hugo has attracted 9% as many forks as stars, studiocms 7%. hugo was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (cms, content-management-system), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

hugo ★ 90K studiocms ★ 833 category Content & Publishing

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

hugo studiocms
GitHub stars ★ 90K ★ 833
License Apache-2.0 MIT
Written in Go TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-17 2026-09-16
Forks ⑂ 8.4K ⑂ 59
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick hugo if

  • You weight community size — 90K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Go
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full hugo profile →

pick studiocms if

  • You want the studiocms feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You evaluated both and studiocms fits your workflow better

full studiocms profile →

About hugo

Hugo is a static site generator written in Go that renders a complete site in seconds, often less, and it is aimed at developers, technical writers, and content teams who build blogs, documentation sites, portfolios, landing pages, and corporate sites as static files.

read the full hugo overview →

About studiocms

StudioCMS is an SSR (server side rendered) headless content management system built natively for the Astro ecosystem, aimed at Astro developers and teams who want to author and manage content for a server rendered Astro site without leaving Astro's own tooling.

read the full studiocms overview →

More in Content & Publishing

next.js ★ 142K storybook ★ 91K Understand-Anything ★ 83K Strapi ★ 73K nuxt ★ 61K gatsby ★ 56K

Related comparisons

hugo vs strapi hugo vs payload hugo vs halo hugo vs filament hugo vs wagtail hugo vs decap-cms strapi vs payload strapi vs halo next-js vs nuxt next-js vs gatsby next-js vs ghost next-js vs jekyll next-js vs hexo next-js vs nextra next-js vs kit next-js vs vike storybook vs understand-anything storybook vs devdocs storybook vs docsify understand-anything vs devdocs storybook vs wiki storybook vs mkdocs-material understand-anything vs docsify understand-anything vs wiki

More Content Management Systems (CMS) projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Content Management Systems (CMS) field.

hugo vs Strapi hugo vs Payload hugo vs halo hugo vs filament hugo vs wagtail hugo vs decap-cms hugo vs TinaCMS hugo vs frappe hugo vs Instatic hugo vs OrchardCore hugo vs Publii hugo vs sanity

Frequently asked questions

Is hugo or studiocms more popular?

hugo has 89,854 GitHub stars and studiocms has 833. hugo has the larger community by that measure.

Are hugo and studiocms free?

Both are open source. hugo is licensed under Apache-2.0 and studiocms under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between hugo and studiocms?

hugo is written in Go and studiocms in TypeScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, hugo or studiocms?

Choose hugo if you want the larger community (89,854 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose studiocms if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.