Compare

Docusaurus

Key differences

• Developer Experience: xyd focuses on zero-config setup and developer experience, while Docusaurus requires React ecosystem knowledge
• API Documentation: xyd has native support for OpenAPI and GraphQL, while Docusaurus relies on third-party plugins
• Analytics & A/B Testing: xyd includes built-in analytics and A/B testing capabilities, which Docusaurus lacks
• Themes: xyd offers 6 built-in themes with a design system approach, while Docusaurus has limited theme options

What people like about Docusaurus

• Large community and ecosystem
• React-based, familiar for React developers
• Good for content-heavy documentation
• Stable and mature platform
• Extensive plugin ecosystem

What people dislike about Docusaurus

• Requires React knowledge
• Limited built-in features
• Complex setup for advanced features
• Limited customization without deep React knowledge

VitePress

Key differences

• API Documentation: xyd excels at API docs with native OpenAPI/GraphQL support, while VitePress relies on third-parties or does not support some
• Features: xyd includes analytics, A/B testing, and chat integrations out of the box
• Themes: xyd offers multiple themes, VitePress has limited theming options
• Use Case: VitePress is great for simple docs, xyd is designed for comprehensive documentation platforms

What people like about VitePress

• Extremely fast build times with Vite
• Simple and lightweight
• Great for technical documentation
• Vue.js based, familiar for Vue developers
• Excellent performance
• Easy to customize with CSS

What people dislike about VitePress

• Limited built-in features
• No native API documentation support
• Requires Vue.js knowledge for advanced modification
• No analytics or A/B testing built-in
• In some cases, default theme can be too simple

Starlight

Key differences

• Developer Experience: xyd focuses on zero-config setup and developer experience, while Starlight requires Astro ecosystem knowledge
• API Documentation: Starlight does not have native API docs support, it relies on third party
• Features: xyd includes enterprise features like analytics and A/B testing

What people like about Starlight

• Built on Astro for excellent performance
• Great for content-heavy documentation
• Good for internationalization
• Clean and modern design
• Easy to get started

What people dislike about Starlight

• Limited built-in features
• Complex setup for advanced features
• No native analytics or A/B testing

Nextra

Key differences

• Developer Experience: xyd focuses on zero-config setup and developer experience, while Nextra requires Next ecosystem knowledge
• API Documentation: xyd specializes in API docs, Nextra is more general-purpose
• Features: xyd includes enterprise features like analytics and A/B testing
• Themes: xyd offers multiple themes, Nextra relies on custom styling

What people like about Nextra

• Built on Next.js for excellent performance
• Great for general websites and blogs
• Flexible and customizable
• React-based, familiar for React developers

What people dislike about Nextra

• Limited built-in documentation features
• No native API documentation support
• No analytics or A/B testing built-in
• Requires too much technical knowledge

Fumadocs

Key differences

• Developer Experience: xyd focuses on zero-config setup and developer experience, while Nextra requires Next ecosystem knowledge
• API Documentation: Fuma docs does not support GraphQL
• Features: xyd includes enterprise features like analytics and A/B testing
• Themes: xyd offers multiple themes, Fumadocs has limited theming

What people like about Fumadocs

• Built on Next.js for good performance
• Good for content documentation
• Clean and simple design
• React-based, familiar for React developers

What people dislike about Fumadocs

• No native analytics or A/B testing
• Limited theme options
• Requires too much technical knowledge

Mintlify

Key differences

• Open Source: xyd is True open source, Mintlify is proprietary
• API Documentation: Mintlify does not support GraphQL
• Features: xyd includes A/B testing integrations

What people like about Mintlify

• Excellent API documentation features
• Beautiful, modern design
• Great developer experience
• Built-in analytics
• Fast and responsive

What people dislike about Mintlify

• Not open source
• Vendor lock-in concerns
• No A/B testing capabilities

Fern

Key differences

• Open Source: xyd is true open source, Fern is not - some features are enterprise only
• Themes: xyd offers multiple themes, Fern has limited theming
• API Support: Fern does not support GraphQL

What people like about Fern

• Excellent API documentation features
• Built-in SDK generation
• Good developer experience
• Clean design
• Fast performance
• Good for API-first companies

What people dislike about Fern

• Not true open source
• Limited customization options
• Limited theme options
• Vendor lock-in concerns

Summary

We build xyd to scale in mind. At LiveSession we need robust options to generate our docs from multiple sources like OpenAPI, GraphQL, CLI, code and much more. We take care of UX seriously too. We're obsessed about that.

For us, it's not only a docs framework, it's something more. We are on the road to build the best developer platform for product analytics. If you need a scalable and true Open Source solution, xyd is for you. Read a story about that.

Migration tool

Check our migration tool or start with our starter template.