When building a documentation site, two popular options stand out: Hugo and Material for MkDocs. This post explores their key differences to help you decide which one suits your workflow best.
Feature | MkDocs (Material) | Hugo |
---|---|---|
Main Purpose | Built specifically for documentation sites | General-purpose static site generator |
Ease of Use | Easier to set up and use, minimal configuration | More complex due to templating and structure |
Customization | Limited (some via plugins or JavaScript) | Fully customizable via Go templating |
Frontmatter Support | Supports frontmatter but with limited flexibility | Full frontmatter support with conditional logic |
Hiding Pages | hidden: true in frontmatter |
draft: true or excluding in menu templates |
Dynamic Page Behavior | Limited (Markdown extensions, JavaScript, plugins) | Fully supports conditionals and templating |
Performance | Fast for small-to-medium sites | Extremely fast, scales better for large sites |
Search | Built-in instant search via Lunr.js | No built-in search; requires third-party solutions (e.g., Algolia) |
Image Handling | Can store images next to Markdown files | Requires images outside content/ , unless using page bundles |
Multilingual Support | Basic support via MkDocs-Material extensions | Native multilingual support built-in |
Theme Customization | Material theme is highly polished and customizable via CSS/JS | Requires modifying templates; themes vary in quality |
Plugins & Extensions | Supports plugins like mkdocs-macros-plugin and mkdocs-material |
Vast ecosystem of themes and custom shortcodes |
Obsidian Integration | Supports [[wikilinks]] and embedded images with plugins |
Requires converting [[wikilinks]] , no native embedded images |
Blogging & Other Content | Not ideal for non-documentation content | Flexible for mixing documentation with blogs, portfolios, etc. |
Final Recommendation
- Choose Hugo if: You need full customization, multilingual support, and high performance.
- Choose MkDocs if: You want a quick setup, built-in search, and better Obsidian compatibility.
For a pure documentation site, Material for MkDocs is simpler. For flexibility and scalability, Hugo is the way to go.