Gatsby vs Astro
For most teams leaving Gatsby, Astro is the closest fit: a static-first framework that can still render your React components, without the mandatory GraphQL data layer, and under active development. Here's the honest comparison.
If you're moving a Gatsby content or marketing site, Astro is usually the best target. It ships near-zero JavaScript by default, renders your existing React components inside islands, and drops Gatsby's required GraphQL layer for plain content collections. Choose Next.js instead only if you need heavy app-like interactivity or full-stack SSR.
Side by side
Gatsby vs Astro, feature by feature
Both are free, open-source, static-first frameworks. The differences that matter for a migration are the client-JS default, the data layer, and how actively each is maintained.
| Dimension | Gatsby | Astro |
|---|---|---|
| Language / UI | React | React / Vue / Svelte / Solid / more |
| Rendering | SSG (+ DSG / SSR) | SSG + SSR, islands |
| Client JS (default) | Full React app hydration | Near-zero (islands) |
| Data layer | Internal GraphQL (required) | Content collections / plain fetch (no GraphQL required) |
| Images | gatsby-plugin-image | astro:assets (built-in) |
| React component reuse | Native | Yes: via React islands |
| Dev status (2026) | Maintenance: last release Feb 2025 | Active: Astro 6 GA March 2026 |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Best for | Existing Gatsby sites | New content & marketing sites |
Official sites: Gatsby · Astro. Astro Technology Company joined Cloudflare in January 2026; Astro remains MIT and deploy-target-agnostic.
The migration
What moving from Gatsby to Astro actually involves
What ports easily. Presentational React components usually drop into Astro as React islands with little change. Your Markdown and MDX content moves into Astro's content collections, and your design system and CSS come across as-is.
What you rewrite. The Gatsby-specific plumbing: gatsby-node.js page creation, GraphQL page queries and useStaticQuery, and any reliance on unmaintained source/transformer plugins. In Astro these become file-based pages, content-collection queries, or plain fetch calls at build time.
The payoff. A lighter site by default (islands ship JavaScript only where you opt in) and a framework that's actively shipping releases, so you're not maintaining a frozen stack. The trade-off: Astro is less suited to heavily interactive, app-like products, where Next.js is the better React path.
Common questions
Gatsby vs Astro: common questions
Can I reuse my Gatsby React components in Astro?
Often, yes. Astro's islands architecture can render React components directly, so presentational components usually port over with little change. What you rewrite is the page and data plumbing: Gatsby's GraphQL queries and page-creation logic become Astro pages, content collections or plain data fetching.
Does Astro require GraphQL like Gatsby?
No. Astro has no mandatory data layer. You read Markdown and MDX through content collections, or fetch from any API or CMS with plain JavaScript at build time. GraphQL is optional, not the default path, which many developers find simpler than Gatsby's internal GraphQL layer.
Is Astro faster than Gatsby?
For most content sites, the shipped result is lighter: Astro sends near-zero JavaScript by default via islands, while Gatsby hydrates a full React app on every page. Build times depend on the site, but the runtime payload is usually smaller with Astro, which tends to help Core Web Vitals.