Softwr

Web Development · head to head

Astro vs Preact

Astro logo

Astro

Web Development

Web framework for content-driven sites shipping minimal JavaScript by default

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Preact logo

Preact

Web Development

3kB alternative to React with the same modern API

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Astro limited to static site generation and server-side rendering; real-time applications requiring constant client-server communication are unsuitable; Preact compatibility through preact/compat is good but not total, and some React libraries break in ways that are hard to diagnose

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Astro and Preact actually diverge.

Attributes where Astro and Preact differ
AttributeAstroPreact
Pricing modelopen-sourceOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsWeb, Node.js, Cloudflare, Vercel, Netlify, AWS, DenoWeb

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Web Development).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Astro

Nothing recorded that Preact does not also cover.

Only in Preact

  • 3kB runtime
  • preact/compat
  • Same modern API
  • Fast rendering

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Astro

  • Marketing websites and landing pages prioritising performance and SEOnot Preact
  • Documentation and blog platforms with high page volumesnot Preact
  • E-commerce storefronts where page speed affects conversion ratesnot Preact
  • Portfolio and personal websites showcasing static content with minimal interactivitynot Preact
  • Multi-language sites requiring efficient content management and translationnot Preact
  • JAMstack projects integrating headless CMS platforms (Contentful, Sanity, Strapi)not Preact

Preact

  • Embedded widgets that load inside someone else’s page and must stay smallnot Astro
  • Marketing and content sites where JavaScript payload affects Core Web Vitalsnot Astro
  • Applications targeting low-bandwidth or low-powered devicesnot Astro

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Astro

  • Limited to static site generation and server-side rendering; real-time applications requiring constant client-server communication are unsuitable
  • Smaller ecosystem compared to Next.js; fewer third-party component libraries and integrations readily available
  • Build time increases with large content volumes (1,000+ pages); incremental builds not yet as optimised as Gatsby or Next.js
  • API routes and serverless functions are less mature than Next.js; complex backend integrations require additional tooling

Preact

  • Compatibility through preact/compat is good but not total, and some React libraries break in ways that are hard to diagnose
  • Behavioural differences from React exist in edge cases, particularly around event handling
  • A much smaller community, so unusual problems have fewer existing answers than React

Pricing, plan by plan

Astro

Free

No published plan breakdown. See the Astro review.

Preact

Free
  • PreactFree
    • Full library
    • Commercial use permitted
    • No usage limits

Which should you pick?

Choose Astro if

  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, Node.js, Cloudflare, Vercel, Netlify, AWS, Deno.
Astro review

Choose Preact if

  • You need 3kb runtime.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want preact/compat.
Preact review

Questions people ask

Is Astro or Preact better?
Neither clearly leads. Astro starts at Free and Preact at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Astro or Preact?
Astro starts at Free and Preact at Free.
Does Astro or Preact run on more platforms?
Astro runs on Web, Node.js, Cloudflare, Vercel, Netlify, AWS, Deno. Preact runs on Web.
Can I use Astro for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Astro best used for?
Astro is most often used for marketing websites and landing pages prioritising performance and seo, documentation and blog platforms with high page volumes, e-commerce storefronts where page speed affects conversion rates, portfolio and personal websites showcasing static content with minimal interactivity. Of those, marketing websites and landing pages prioritising performance and seo and documentation and blog platforms with high page volumes are not what Preact is typically brought in for.
What can Astro do that Preact cannot?
Preact covers 3kB runtime, preact/compat, Same modern API, Fast rendering.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Astro: Is Astro free?

Yes. Astro is free and open-source under MIT licence. Deployment hosting (Vercel, Netlify, Cloudflare, AWS) may incur costs depending on usage.

Source
Preact: Is Preact free?

Yes, open source under the MIT licence.

Astro: Can I use React components in Astro?

Yes. Astro supports React, Vue, Svelte, Preact, and Solid components. Components are server-rendered by default; add client: directives to enable client-side interactivity only where needed.

Source
Preact: Can I use React libraries with Preact?

Most, through the preact/compat layer. Compatibility is good but not complete, so libraries relying on React internals can break.

Astro: How does Astro compare to Next.js for performance?

Astro achieves superior Core Web Vitals scores (66% pass rate vs Next.js 30%) by shipping minimal JavaScript. Next.js defaults to client-side rendering; Astro renders on the server by default.

Source
Preact: Why choose Preact over React?

Bundle size, almost always. If payload is not a binding constraint, React’s ecosystem is usually the better trade.

Share

Related pages

More on Astro

More on Preact

Keep looking

Other head to heads