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.