Softwr

Documentation · head to head

Fumadocs vs ReadMe

Fumadocs logo

Fumadocs

Documentation

Documentation framework for Next.js that treats the docs site as an application rather than a static export

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
ReadMe logo

ReadMe

Documentation

Hosted developer hub priced per API project, with docs personalised from live request logs

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Fumadocs it is a library rather than a finished theme, so the initial setup is meaningfully longer than a generator that ships a working site from one command.; ReadMe pricing is per project, so an organisation with several distinct APIs multiplies the monthly bill rather than adding seats, and the sensible workaround, merging unrelated APIs into one documentation project, distorts the information architecture to fit the invoice.
  • They diverge on capability: Fumadocs covers Next.js App Router native, ReadMe covers OpenAPI reference.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Fumadocs and ReadMe actually diverge.

Attributes where Fumadocs and ReadMe differ
AttributeFumadocsReadMe
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feePer project per month
PlatformsWeb, macOS, Windows, LinuxWeb

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

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 Fumadocs

  • Next.js App Router native
  • Multiple content sources
  • OpenAPI page generation
  • Built in search
  • Headless and styled layers
  • Type safe frontmatter
  • Code and content colocation

Only in ReadMe

  • OpenAPI reference
  • Try It playground
  • API metrics
  • Personalised docs
  • Versioning
  • Guides and recipes
  • Git sync via rdme
  • Changelog and support widget

What people use each for

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

Fumadocs

  • Documentation that must sit behind login and show different content to different customer plansnot ReadMe
  • A Next.js product team that wants docs to deploy in the same pipeline as the applicationnot ReadMe
  • API reference pages generated from an OpenAPI document alongside hand written guides in one navigation treenot ReadMe
  • A design system site where the component documentation must render the live components from the same codebasenot ReadMe

ReadMe

  • Publishing a public API reference where a developer can send a live request with their own key from the documentation pagenot Fumadocs
  • Cutting support load by showing an integrating developer their own recent failing requests next to the endpoint descriptionnot Fumadocs
  • Keeping documentation versions aligned with API versions so customers on an older release read the matching referencenot Fumadocs
  • Shipping documentation from the same pull request as the code change using the rdme command line tool in CInot Fumadocs

Where each one falls short

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

Fumadocs

  • It is a library rather than a finished theme, so the initial setup is meaningfully longer than a generator that ships a working site from one command.
  • Maintenance is concentrated in a very small group, so an unresponsive week is a blocked upgrade and there is no support contract to escalate to.
  • It only targets Next.js, so adopting it commits the documentation to that framework and a later migration means rewriting the site rather than swapping a theme.
  • Breaking changes have arrived across minor versions during rapid development, so pinning versions and reading migration notes is a recurring cost rather than a one off.
  • Running docs inside the application means docs traffic hits your application infrastructure and shares its failure modes, where a separate static site would have stayed up.

ReadMe

  • Pricing is per project, so an organisation with several distinct APIs multiplies the monthly bill rather than adding seats, and the sensible workaround, merging unrelated APIs into one documentation project, distorts the information architecture to fit the invoice.
  • The metrics and personalisation features require your API to stream request logs to ReadMe, which means production request metadata leaves your infrastructure and needs a scrubbing layer plus a security review before anything is switched on.
  • Single sign-on and private documentation sit on the higher tier, so a company that only needs to gate partner documentation behind SAML pays a large step up for one control.
  • The platform is built for describing REST APIs, and long-form product manuals, internal knowledge bases or non-OpenAPI protocols fit it badly, so most customers end up running a second documentation tool alongside it.
  • Theming is bounded by ReadMe templates and limited custom CSS, so a documentation site that must match a strongly designed marketing site will not get there without compromise.
  • Content uses ReadMe-specific Markdown extensions and platform features, so migrating away is an export plus a rewrite rather than moving a folder of Markdown files.

Pricing, plan by plan

Fumadocs

Free
  • Open sourceFree
    • MIT licence
    • All packages included
    • Self hosted or deployed with your Next.js application

ReadMe

Free
  • FreeFree
    • One project on a ReadMe subdomain
    • OpenAPI reference and guides
    • Basic editing and publishing
  • Startup$99/month
    • One project
    • Custom domain
    • API metrics from request logs
  • Business$399/month
    • One project
    • SAML single sign-on
    • Private and partner-only documentation
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Multiple projects under one contract
    • Negotiated support and uptime terms
    • Security review and custom deployment questions

Which should you pick?

Choose Fumadocs if

  • You need next.js app router native.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, macOS, Windows, Linux.
  • You also want multiple content sources.
Fumadocs review

Choose ReadMe if

  • You need openapi reference.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You also want try it playground.
ReadMe review

Questions people ask

Is Fumadocs or ReadMe better?
Neither clearly leads. Fumadocs starts at Free and ReadMe at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Fumadocs or ReadMe?
Fumadocs starts at Free and ReadMe at Free.
Does Fumadocs or ReadMe run on more platforms?
Fumadocs runs on Web, macOS, Windows, Linux. ReadMe runs on Web.
Can I use Fumadocs for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Fumadocs best used for?
Fumadocs is most often used for documentation that must sit behind login and show different content to different customer plans, a next.js product team that wants docs to deploy in the same pipeline as the application, api reference pages generated from an openapi document alongside hand written guides in one navigation tree, a design system site where the component documentation must render the live components from the same codebase. Of those, documentation that must sit behind login and show different content to different customer plans and a next.js product team that wants docs to deploy in the same pipeline as the application are not what ReadMe is typically brought in for.
What can Fumadocs do that ReadMe cannot?
Fumadocs covers Next.js App Router native, Multiple content sources, OpenAPI page generation, Built in search. ReadMe covers OpenAPI reference, Try It playground, API metrics, Personalised docs.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Fumadocs: Can I put documentation behind authentication?

Yes. Pages are Next.js server components, so the same session and authorisation checks the rest of the application uses apply.

ReadMe: Is ReadMe priced per user?

No. It is priced per project, meaning per documented API. Team size does not change the bill, and a second API generally does.

Fumadocs: Does it work outside Next.js?

No. The UI layer depends on the Next.js App Router.

ReadMe: Do I have to send my API logs to ReadMe?

Only for metrics and personalised documentation. The reference, guides and playground work without it, but the features that most distinguish the product are the ones that need the log stream.

Fumadocs: Can it generate pages from an OpenAPI spec?

Yes, including operation pages, schema rendering and an interactive request playground.

ReadMe: Can I keep documentation in Git?

Yes. The rdme command line tool synchronises Markdown and OpenAPI files from a repository, so documentation can ship in the same pull request as the code.

Fumadocs: Who maintains it and is that a risk?

A very small maintainer group. For a long lived commercial documentation set, treat the low bus factor as a real risk and budget for owning a fork.

ReadMe: Can I self-host it?

No. ReadMe is a hosted product only, so buyers with a hard on-premises requirement need a different platform.

Fumadocs: Do I still need a separate docs deployment?

No, and avoiding one is the main reason to choose it. The cost is that docs share your application uptime.

Share

Related pages

More on Fumadocs

More on ReadMe

Keep looking

Other head to heads