chi vs Kratos
Which should you use? A side-by-side look at what each one does, who it suits, what it costs, how hard it is to set up, and where each falls short.
Open source · MIT
A small, standard-library-compatible router for building Go HTTP and REST API services.
Open source · MIT
A lightweight Go framework for building cloud-native microservices.
The short answer
Choose chi if you need…
- Go developers building REST API services
- Teams that want routing built on the standard net/http package
- Projects that need route groups, nested sub-routers, or mounted handlers
- Developers who want optional middleware and route documentation generation
Choose Kratos if you need…
- Go developers building a set of backend services that talk over HTTP or gRPC
- Teams that want an API-first workflow starting from Protobuf definitions
- Developers who want a lightweight framework with explicit, composable components
- Teams moving to cloud-native deployments who want pluggable registries and configuration
Side-by-side
| chi | Kratos | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | Library | Library |
| Price | Free and open source | Free and open source |
| Licence | MIT | MIT |
| GitHub stars | 23k | 26k |
| Setup difficulty | Intermediate | Intermediate |
| How you get it | Install with a package manager | Install with a package manager |
| Main language | Go | Go |
| Last code update | 19 days ago | 5 days ago |
What each one is
chi
chi is a routing library for Go that maps incoming web requests to the code that should handle them, such as sending /articles/123 to a function that loads article 123. It is built on Go's standard net/http package and context package, so handlers and middleware written for the standard library generally work with it. It is aimed at larger REST API projects that need to stay organized as they grow.
Kratos
Kratos is a Go framework for building microservices, the small backend services that together make up a larger application. It provides APIs for handling HTTP and gRPC traffic, middleware, service registry, configuration, logging, and code generation from Protobuf definitions, so developers can focus on business logic. It is maintained as an open-source project under the MIT license.
Best for
chi
- Go developers building REST API services
- Teams that want routing built on the standard net/http package
- Projects that need route groups, nested sub-routers, or mounted handlers
- Developers who want optional middleware and route documentation generation
Kratos
- Go developers building a set of backend services that talk over HTTP or gRPC
- Teams that want an API-first workflow starting from Protobuf definitions
- Developers who want a lightweight framework with explicit, composable components
- Teams moving to cloud-native deployments who want pluggable registries and configuration
Strengths
chi
- Small core router (the README says under 1000 lines of code) with no external dependencies
- Compatible with net/http, so existing standard-library handlers and middleware can be reused
- Supports route groups, sub-routers, and mounting for organizing large APIs
Kratos
- Unified transport layer covering both HTTP and gRPC
- Composable middleware and pluggable components for registry, config, and encoding
- Uses the standard library log/slog for logging, with OpenTelemetry extensions in contrib packages
Not ideal for
chi
- Developers who want a full web framework with templates, ORM, and built-in auth, since chi covers routing and relies on separate packages for other needs
- People not writing Go, since the library is Go-only
- Beginners with no Go experience, since the README assumes familiarity with Go handlers and context
Kratos
- Developers who do not use Go, since the framework is written for Go only
- Beginners with no Go or Protobuf experience, because the setup requires installing protoc and protoc-gen-go first
- Teams planning to upgrade from v2 without reviewing the migration guide, since v3 changes implicit behavior
Trade-offs
chi
- Routing only; features like rendering, validation, and database access need separate packages or your own code
- The README's examples use string keys for context values, which is a pattern the README itself shows and not a fully type-safe approach
Kratos
- Requires several tools to be installed before a first generated service runs (Go 1.25+, protoc, protoc-gen-go)
- The latest release v3.0.0 has no prebuilt binaries, so installation goes through Go tooling
- Upgrading from v2 requires reading the migration guide because v3 changes previously implicit behavior
Getting started
Kratos
Install the CLI
go install github.com/go-kratos/kratos/cmd/kratos/v3@latestUpgrade the CLI tooling
kratos upgradeFrequently asked questions
What is the difference between chi and Kratos?
chi: A small, standard-library-compatible router for building Go HTTP and REST API services. Kratos: A lightweight Go framework for building cloud-native microservices. chi suits go developers building rest api services, while Kratos suits go developers building a set of backend services that talk over http or grpc.
Are chi and Kratos free?
chi: Free and open source. Kratos: Free and open source.
Is chi or Kratos more popular?
Kratos has more GitHub stars (26k) than chi (23k). Popularity isn't the same as fit — check which one matches your use case above.
What are other alternatives to chi and Kratos?
Other options people compare them with include Gin, Echo, dio, go-zero, warp.
Keep comparing
Built from our catalogue entries for both products: open-source details come from each project's README (AI-assisted, refreshed weekly) and GitHub data; AI-tool details are editorial. Spotted something wrong? Let us know from either product's page.