Pros and Cons of Static Site Generators for Web Professionals (And How Duda is Different)

July 9, 2020
0 minute read

Static websites are one of the long-time staples of the world wide web. In the early days, this was often the best option for web professionals who needed to create engaging custom websites that were ultra-secure and loaded quickly. What makes these sites so secure and fast  is they have a very simple architecture — HTML files stored directly on the file system of a web server. In certain cases, static sites remain a great option. Over the years, static site generators (SSGs) have also made the process of creating static sites easier; however, these are still fundamentally developer-centric tools that require a fair amount of code-knowledge and retain limitations that make scalability an issue. 


Duda Sales Engineer Jason Hummel has a fair amount of experience working with static site generators and recently sat for an interview to walk through their pros and cons, common use cases, and what makes SSGs different from Duda.


This interview has been edited for clarity and broken into sections for the tl;dr crowd.


Let’s dive in...




What Are Static Site Generators?



Let’s start by defining a couple of key terms. First, what is a static site? And second, what is a static site generator?


“Sure thing. A static site is a simple website that’s made up of HTML files that all reside on a server somewhere in the world. These are files that a developer essentially needs to code by hand, but a static site generator can save you some time by giving you basic site structures along with a few other tools that help you create reusable templates and ease the creation of new content. They basically just make the process of building static sites a little more efficient."













Pros & Cons of Static Site Generators

Static sites have a reputation for being very fast and secure. Why is that?


“Static sites are super simple and that’s what makes them quick to load and very secure. There isn’t a database associated with the site for a hacker to go poking around in and since site visitors only need to access the HTML files directly from the file system, their load times are usually very fast. However, a static site isn’t guaranteed to be fast. As the developer you need to be cognizant of keeping things snappy by not adding too many assets to the pages. Also, as sites get bigger, it will take the generator longer and longer to generate the HTML files, which can lead to a poor developer experience.”


So if speed, security and the freedom to basically code whatever you want are the main advantages of working with static sites and static site generators, are there any trade-offs digital agencies and web professionals should know about when considering whether or not to use them?


“Scalability is really the biggest issue with static site generators. For example, let’s say you’re using
Jekyll and you have 100 clients. That means you’re essentially going to have to set up 100 static site generators. So let’s assume you’re really good at this and you want to make it easy for your client to engage in the process and do some basic site management. You’ve set something up so the client can use a form to send you their business information and some content. You’ve made it possible for a user to preview changes before publishing the site. You’ve integrated with Let’s Encrypt to generate SSL certificates. Let’s say you get all of that set up to create this great experience for you and the client. You have to do that 100 times because you have 100 clients.


Now, you can consolidate all of that somewhat, but you’re managing
everything. Additionally, you’re going to be pretty limited in the types of sites you can create. Things like login pages or landing pages with an integration with a CRM or scheduling tool like vcita are going to be very hard to set up.”


Are there any other issues beyond setting up those individual site instances and handling the minutiae of updating HTML files by hand?


“I would say web professionals and digital agencies that work with static site generators need to be extra sure they’re keeping a close eye on the latest industry regulations. For example, let’s take something like accessibility. Web accessibility standards are actually mandated by law in some countries and if you’re working with a static site generator, you can’t outsource bringing those sites into compliance with a solution like
AudioEye in Duda’s App Store. You’re on the hook for making those changes yourself.”






Need a more scalable way to build super fast and secure websites? Start a Duda free trial today!

Use Cases for Static Site Generators



Given that they’re not particularly scalable, what are the use cases in which it makes sense for a digital agency or web professional to work with a static site generator? 


“When I was at an agency, we had a client that made network security software. They wanted a static site because they were concerned about the possibility of being hacked and what that would look like to customers if it happened. But they also had a whole content team that was regularly writing blog posts and making updates to the site and needed to find a way to make this work. We ended up implementing a system that would allow them to update the site using a simplified CMS instead of hand coding or writing in
Markdown. But even after all of our optimizations and improvements, I’d say we only got them about 80% of the way to where they wanted to be. 


However, if you’re in a position where security is so incredibly important, static site generators might be the way to go."










Differences Between Duda & Static Site Generators



What makes Duda websites different from static sites and the Duda platform different from static site generators?


“Duda actually works in a similar way to most static site builders. But we add in a few extra elements to create a more user-friendly WYSIWYG site-building and management experience. We also separate the content from design, which enables designers, marketing professionals and end users to take more ownership of the process.


What’s interesting about Duda is we’re really a cross between a traditional CMS that connects to a database and a static site generator. When you make changes in Duda’s site builder, we cache the HTML and know how that’s going to look, so we actually render out the site and save it in a similar way. Additionally, we create individual HTML files for desktop, tablet and mobile versions of each page. 


We don’t have these files sitting on the file system, but we do have them saved as actual HTML in our infrastructure. This allows us to provide much of the same speed benefit that static site generators offer since we’re serving up static HTML when a visitor lands on a site."


So what allows Duda to create things like dynamic pages?



"This is where the more CMS-related part of the Duda platform comes in. Duda is able to take data and automatically bring up, tear down and update pages based on data that is coming from another source besides the server. That can be from the Duda platform itself or something like a product catalogue. We can interface with that data and generate pages on the fly which makes us way more scalable than SSGs.


You can achieve some of this functionality through work arounds and some static site generators, like
Gatsby, will get you part of the way there. But you won’t be able to get the level of convenience you will with Duda."




Did you find this article interesting?


Thanks for the feedback!
By Shawn Davis April 1, 2026
Core Web Vitals aren't new, Google introduced them in 2020 and made them a ranking factor in 2021. But the questions keep coming, because the metrics keep changing and the stakes keep rising. Reddit's SEO communities were still debating their impact as recently as January 2026, and for good reason: most agencies still don't have a clear, repeatable way to measure, diagnose, and fix them for clients. This guide cuts through the noise. Here's what Core Web Vitals actually measure, what good scores look like today, and how to improve them—without needing a dedicated performance engineer on every project. What Core Web Vitals measure Google evaluates three user experience signals to determine whether a page feels fast, stable, and responsive: Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) measures how long it takes for the biggest visible element on a page — usually a hero image or headline — to load. Google considers anything under 2.5 seconds good. Above 4 seconds is poor. Interaction to Next Paint (INP) replaced First Input Delay (FID) in March 2024. Where FID measures the delay before a user's first click is registered, INP tracks the full responsiveness of every interaction across the page session. A good INP score is under 200 milliseconds. Cumulative Layout Shift (CLS) measures visual stability — how much page elements unexpectedly move while content loads. A score below 0.1 is good. Higher scores signal that images, ads, or embeds are pushing content around after load, which frustrates users and tanks conversions. These three metrics are a subset of Google's broader Page Experience signals, which also include HTTPS, safe browsing, and mobile usability. Core Web Vitals are the ones you can most directly control and improve. Why your clients' scores may still be poor Core Web Vitals scores vary dramatically by platform, hosting, and how a site was built. Some of the most common culprits agencies encounter: Heavy above-the-fold content . A homepage with an autoplay video, a full-width image slider, and a chat widget loading simultaneously will fail LCP every time. The browser has to resolve all of those resources before it can paint the largest element. Unstable image dimensions . When an image loads without defined width and height attributes, the browser doesn't reserve space for it. It renders the surrounding text, then jumps it down when the image appears. That jump is CLS. Third-party scripts blocking the main thread . Analytics pixels, ad tags, and live chat tools run on the browser's main thread. When they stack up, every click and tap has to wait in line — driving INP scores up. A single slow third-party script can push an otherwise clean site into "needs improvement" territory. Too many web fonts . Each font family and weight is a separate network request. A page loading four font files before rendering any text will fail LCP, especially on mobile connections. Unoptimized images . JPEGs and PNGs served at full resolution, without compression or modern formats like WebP or AVIF, add unnecessary weight to every page load. How to measure them accurately There are two types of Core Web Vitals data you should be looking at for every client: Lab data comes from tools like Google PageSpeed Insights, Lighthouse, and WebPageTest. It simulates page loads in controlled conditions. Lab data is useful for diagnosing specific issues and testing fixes before you deploy them. Field data (also called Real User Monitoring, or RUM) comes from actual users visiting the site. Google collects this through the Chrome User Experience Report (CrUX) and surfaces it in Search Console and PageSpeed Insights. Field data is what Google actually uses as a ranking signal — and it often looks worse than lab data because it reflects real-world device and connection variability. If your client's site has enough traffic, you'll see field data in Search Console under Core Web Vitals. This is your baseline. Lab data helps you understand why the scores are what they are. For clients with low traffic who don't have enough field data to appear in CrUX, you'll be working primarily with lab scores. Set that expectation early so clients understand that improvements may not immediately show up in Search Console. Practical fixes that move the needle Fix LCP: get the hero image loading first The single most effective LCP improvement is adding fetchpriority="high" to the hero image tag. This tells the browser to prioritize that resource over everything else. If you're using a background CSS image for the hero, switch it to anelement — background images aren't discoverable by the browser's preload scanner. Also check whether your hosting serves images through a CDN with caching. Edge delivery dramatically reduces the time-to-first-byte, which feeds directly into LCP. Fix CLS: define dimensions for every media element Every image, video, and ad slot on the page needs explicit width and height attributes in the HTML. If you're using responsive CSS, you can still define the aspect ratio with aspect-ratio in CSS while leaving the actual size fluid. The key is giving the browser enough information to reserve space before the asset loads. Avoid inserting content above existing content after page load. This is common with cookie banners, sticky headers that change height, and dynamically loaded ad units. If you need to show these, anchor them to fixed positions so they don't push content around. Fix INP: reduce what's competing for the main thread Audit third-party scripts and defer or remove anything that isn't essential. Tools like WebPageTest's waterfall view or Chrome DevTools Performance panel show you exactly which scripts are blocking the main thread and for how long. Load chat widgets, analytics, and ad tags asynchronously and after the page's critical path has resolved. For most clients, moving non-essential scripts to load after the DOMContentLoaded event is a meaningful INP improvement with no visible impact on the user experience. For websites with heavy JavaScript — particularly those built on frameworks with large client-side bundles — consider breaking up long tasks into smaller chunks using the browser's Scheduler API or simply splitting components so the main thread isn't locked for more than 50 milliseconds at a stretch. What platforms handle automatically One of the practical advantages of building on a platform optimized for performance is that many of these fixes are applied by default. Duda, for example, automatically serves WebP images, lazy loads below-the-fold content, minifies CSS, and uses efficient cache policies for static assets. As of May 2025, 82% of sites built on Duda pass all three Core Web Vitals metrics — the highest recorded pass rate among major website platforms. That baseline matters when you're managing dozens or hundreds of client sites. It means you're starting each project close to or at a passing score, rather than diagnosing and patching a broken foundation. How much do Core Web Vitals actually affect rankings? Honestly, they're a tiebreaker — not a primary signal. Google has been clear that content quality and relevance still dominate ranking decisions. A well-optimized site with thin, irrelevant content won't outrank a content-rich competitor just because its CLS is 0.05. What Core Web Vitals do affect is the user experience that supports those rankings. Pages with poor LCP scores have measurably higher bounce rates. Sites with high CLS lose users mid-session. Those behavioral signals — time on page, return visits, conversions — are things search engines can observe and incorporate. The practical argument for fixing Core Web Vitals isn't just "because Google said so." It's that faster, more stable pages convert better. Every second of LCP improvement can reduce bounce rates by 15–20% depending on the industry and device mix. For client sites that monetize through leads or eCommerce, that's a revenue argument, not just an SEO argument. A repeatable process for agencies Audit every new site before launch. Run PageSpeed Insights and record LCP, INP, and CLS scores for both mobile and desktop. Flag anything in the "needs improvement" or "poor" range before the client sees the live site. Check Search Console monthly for existing clients. The Core Web Vitals report surfaces issues as they appear in field data. Catching a regression early — before it compounds — is significantly easier than explaining a traffic drop after the fact. Document what you've improved. Clients rarely see Core Web Vitals scores on their own. A monthly one-page performance summary showing before/after scores builds credibility and makes your technical work visible. Prioritize mobile. Google uses mobile-first indexing, and field data shows that mobile CWV scores are almost always worse than desktop. If you only have time to optimize one version, do mobile first. Core Web Vitals aren't a one-time fix. Platforms change, new scripts get added, campaigns bring in new widgets. Build the audit into your workflow and treat it like any other ongoing deliverable, and you'll stay ahead of the issues before they affect your clients' rankings. Duda's platform is built with Core Web Vitals performance in mind. Explore how it handles image optimization, script management, and site speed automatically — so your team spends less time debugging and more time building.
By Ilana Brudo March 31, 2026
Vertical SaaS must transition from tools to an AI-powered Vertical Operating System (vOS). Learn to leverage context, end tech sprawl, and maximize retention.
By Shawn Davis March 27, 2026
Automate client management, instant site generation, and data synchronization with an API-driven website builder to create a scalable growth engine for your SaaS platform.
Show More

Latest posts