Astro ships zero JavaScript by default, which makes it the right framework for content-heavy sites (blogs, docs, marketing pages, portfolios) where shipping 300KB of JS for mostly-text pages is absurd. It renders everything to static HTML by default and only sends JavaScript for the components that actually need interactivity. Your pages load instantly.

Everything is free under a permissive license. The framework, the build tool, content collections, MDX support, image optimization. All included. Astro makes money through their hosting platform (Astro Studio), not the framework.

The catch: Astro is opinionated about content sites. If you're building a highly interactive dashboard or a real-time app, you'll fight the framework. It CAN do client-side interactivity (it supports React, Vue, Svelte components), but it's designed to minimize it. And the 'island architecture' (where interactive components are isolated), requires a mental shift if you're used to full-page React apps.

The framework is fully open source. Astro DB (their hosted database) has a free tier with paid plans for scale, but the framework itself has no paid features.

**Hosting:** Deploy anywhere: Vercel, Netlify, Cloudflare Pages, a static host, a VPS. Static output means hosting is often literally free (Cloudflare Pages, GitHub Pages).

**Compared to Next.js:** For content sites, Astro produces smaller, faster pages with less complexity. For dynamic apps, Next.js is more capable. The 'cost' of choosing wrong is building half your app before realizing the framework's strengths don't match your needs.

**Astro DB pricing:** Free tier handles small projects. Paid starts at $7/mo for more storage and reads. Optional; you can use any database.

Astro

The Lens

Free vs Self-Hosted vs Paid

Similar Tools

About

Explore Further

More tools in the directory

openclaw

claw-code

n8n