🆚 Font Awesome vs. Fontastic
- 📈 Font Awesome is much more popular than Fontastic.
- 🌍 Font Awesome is more popular in all countries.
FontasticType
About
Font Awesome is a toolkit of web fonts and icon sets that lets developers embed scalable icons via 
CSS, 
JavaScript, or SVG.
It includes over 2,000 free icons across classic and brand packs, and provides access to more than 50,000 icons in the Pro version.
Fontastic is a free web-based icon font generator for creating custom icon fonts from existing collections or SVG icons.
It provides over 9,000 icons from popular sets like 
Font Awesome, 
Entypo, and 
Ionicons, and allows users to select individual icons, customize CSS classes and character mappings, and generate custom font packages.
Headquarters
Pricing
Popularity
Determined by the number of sites using each technology.
Market share
Popularity by country
Determined by the number of sites detected from each country.
Awards
- 🥇 Most popular in the United States in the Icons category.
- 🥇 Most popular in Japan in the Icons category.
- 🥇 Most popular in the United Kingdom in the Icons category.
- 🥇 Most popular in Germany in the Icons category.
- 🥇 Most popular in Spain in the Icons category.
- 🥉 Third most popular in Israel in the Tools category.
- ⭐ 5th most popular in the United Kingdom in the Tools category.
- ⭐ 5th most popular in India in the Tools category.
- ⭐ 7th most popular in Germany in the Tools category.
- ⭐ 7th most popular in Italy in the Tools category.
Popularity by domain category
Determined by the number of sites in each category.
Top sites
Top-ranked sites that use these technologies.
Compare alternatives
Technologies with similar characteristics.
🗃️ About This Data
- We evaluate the popularity of technologies based on the number of websites where we detect their usage.
- Technologies without a detectable web footprint, and those we do not track, are not reflected in the calculated market share.
- This report is based on the analysis of 3,827,502 websites.
- Statistics were last calculated on .
- For more details, see our methodology and disclaimer.