next-i18next VS next-intl VS intlayer | Next.js Internationalisation (i18n)

This guide compares three widely used i18n options for Next.js: next-intl, next-i18next, and Intlayer. We focus on Next.js 13+ App Router (with React Server Components) and evaluate:

1. Architecture & content organisation
2. TypeScript & safety
3. Missing translation handling
4. Routing & middleware
5. Performance & loading behaviour
6. Developer experience (DX), tooling & maintenance
7. SEO & large-project scalability

tl;dr: All three can localise a Next.js app. If you want component-scoped content, strict TypeScript types, build-time missing-key checks, tree-shaken dictionaries, and first-class App Router + SEO helpers, Intlayer is the most complete, modern choice.

---

High-level positioning

• next-intl - Lightweight, straightforward message formatting with solid Next.js support. Centralised catalogues are common; DX is simple, but safety and large-scale maintenance remain mostly your responsibility.
• next-i18next - i18next in Next.js attire. Mature ecosystem and features via plugins (e.g., ICU), but configuration can be verbose and catalogues tend to centralise as projects grow.
• Intlayer - Component-centric content model for Next.js, strict TS typing, build-time checks, tree-shaking, built-in middleware & SEO helpers, optional Visual Editor/CMS, and AI-assisted translations.

---

Side-by-Side Feature Comparison (Next.js focused)

---

Deep-dive comparison

1) Architecture & scalability

• next-intl / next-i18next: Default to centralised catalogues per locale (plus namespaces in i18next). Works fine early on, but often becomes a big shared surface area with rising coupling and key churn.
• Intlayer: Encourages per-component (or per-feature) dictionaries co-located with the code they serve. This lowers cognitive load, eases duplication/migration of UI pieces, and reduces cross-team conflicts. Unused content is naturally easier to spot and purge.

Why it matters: In large codebases or design-system setups, modular content scales better than monolithic catalogues.

---

2) TypeScript & safety

• next-intl: Solid TypeScript support, but keys aren’t strictly typed by default; you’ll maintain safety patterns manually.
• next-i18next: Base typings for hooks; strict key typing requires extra tooling/config.
• Intlayer: Generates strict types from your content. IDE autocompletion and compile-time errors catch typos and missing keys before deployment.

Why it matters: Strong typing shifts failures left (CI/build) instead of right (runtime).

---

3) Missing translation handling

• next-intl / next-i18next: Rely on runtime fallbacks (e.g., show the key or default locale). Build doesn’t fail.
• Intlayer: Build-time detection with warnings/errors for missing locales or keys.

Why it matters: Catching gaps during build prevents “mystery strings” in production and aligns with strict release gates.

---

4) Routing, middleware & URL strategy

• All three work with Next.js localised routing on the App Router.
• Intlayer goes further with i18n middleware (locale detection via headers/cookies) and helpers to generate localised URLs and <link rel="alternate" hreflang="…"> tags.

Why it matters: Fewer custom glue layers; consistent UX and clean SEO across locales.

---

5) Server Components (RSC) alignment

• All support Next.js 13+.
• Intlayer smooths the server/client boundary with a consistent API and providers designed for RSC, so you don’t shuttle formatters or t-functions through component trees.

Why it matters: Cleaner mental model and fewer edge cases in hybrid trees.

---

6) Performance & loading behaviour

• next-intl / next-i18next: Partial control via namespaces and route-level splits; risk of bundling unused strings if discipline slips.
• Intlayer: Tree-shakes at build and lazy-loads per dictionary/locale. Unused content doesn’t ship.

Why it matters: Smaller bundles and faster start-up, especially on multi-locale sites.

---

7) DX, tooling & maintenance

• next-intl / next-i18next: You’ll typically wire up external platforms for translations and editorial workflows.
• Intlayer: Ships a free Visual Editor and optional CMS (Git-friendly or externalised). Plus VSCode extension for content authoring and AI-assisted translations using your own provider keys.

Why it matters: Lowers operational costs and shortens the feedback loop between developers and content authors.

---

When to choose which?

• Choose next-intl if you want a minimal solution, you’re comfortable with centralised catalogues, and your app is small to mid-size.
• Choose next-i18next if you need i18next’s plugin ecosystem (e.g., advanced ICU rules via plugins) and your team already knows i18next, accepting more configuration for flexibility.
• Choose Intlayer if you value component-scoped content, strict TypeScript, build-time guarantees, tree-shaking, and batteries-included routing/SEO/editor tooling - especially for Next.js App Router, design-systems and large, modular codebases.

---

Conclusion

All three libraries succeed at core localisation. The difference is how much work you must do to achieve a robust, scalable setup in modern Next.js:

• With Intlayer, modular content, strict TS, build-time safety, tree-shaken bundles, and first-class App Router + SEO tooling are defaults, not chores.
• If your team values maintainability and speed in a multi-locale, component-driven app, Intlayer offers the most complete experience today.

Refer to the 'Why Intlayer?' doc for more details.