Axum vs Actix Web
Both are mature, fast Rust web frameworks on Tokio. Axum is a thin routing and extraction layer on Hyper that reuses Tower for all middleware, and it is the framework 13 of the 18 Rust apps in the directory that use a web framework picked. Actix Web owns its full HTTP stack and ships routing macros, static files, multipart and an HTTP client in one workspace.
- Axum
- Rust · MIT
- Actix Web
- Rust · Apache-2.0
- Updated
- 2026-10-02
Which one should you pick?
- You want to reuse Tower and tower-http middleware, or share it with tonic gRPC services
- You prefer macro-free routing and a small core crate (axum-core) for your own extractors
- You want the framework most open-source Rust apps in the directory use (OpenObserve, SurrealDB, RustFS, Vector)
- You want batteries in one place: static files, multipart, test servers and the awc client
- You like attribute routing such as #[get("/users/{id}")]
- You need fine control over TLS backends (OpenSSL or Rustls 0.20 to 0.23 via features)
Side by side
| Attribute | Axum | Actix Web |
|---|---|---|
| Written in | Rust | RustShellJust |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Frontend | none | none |
| Backend & APIs | RustAxumTowerHyperTokio | RustActix-webactix-httpTokioWebSockets |
| Data & persistence | none | none |
| Infrastructure & deploy | GitHub Actionscargo-deny | GitHub Actionsjust |
| Key decisions |
|
|
| Audited | f8b02f2 · 2026-10-02 | 30c831f · 2026-10-02 |
How they differ
Architecture
Axum is a routing and request-handling layer. It serves HTTP through Hyper (http1 and http2 features), runs on Tokio, and has no middleware system of its own: routes, handlers and layers are tower::Services, so tower-http supplies timeouts, CORS, compression and tracing. Actix Web implements HTTP itself in actix-http: HTTP/1.x natively, HTTP/2 through h2, WebSocket framing, and compression.
Workspace and batteries
Axum splits into axum, axum-core (stable traits with few dependencies), axum-extra (cookies, typed headers, protobuf) and axum-macros. Everything else comes from the wider ecosystem. Actix Web’s workspace bundles more: actix-router, actix-web-codegen for routing macros, actix-files for static files, actix-multipart, actix-test and the awc HTTP and WebSocket client.
Routing and handlers
Axum routes are plain method calls (Router::new().route("/users", post(create_user))) with typed extractors. Path matching uses matchit, pinned to an exact version. Actix Web offers attribute macros (#[get("/hello/{name}")]) by default and a macro-free web::resource API, on top of its standalone actix-router.
Who uses which
In the directory, Axum powers OpenObserve, SurrealDB, RustFS, Vector, Atuin, crates.io and Kanidm. Actix Web powers Meilisearch, Qdrant, Lemmy and Hyperswitch. Agent-ready rules for an Axum service are in Rust + Axum + PostgreSQL, and for server-rendered pages in Axum + htmx + Askama.
Frequently asked questions
Is Axum faster than Actix Web?
Both are high-performance frameworks on Tokio, and for most applications the time goes to the database rather than the framework. Pick on architecture: Axum reuses Hyper and Tower, Actix Web owns its HTTP stack in actix-http.
Which Rust web framework do open-source projects use most?
In the STACK IT FAST directory, 13 of the 18 open-source Rust apps that depend on a web framework use Axum, 4 use Actix Web (Meilisearch, Qdrant, Lemmy, Hyperswitch) and 1 uses Rocket (Vaultwarden), based on their Cargo.toml files in October 2026.
Do Axum and Actix Web both run on Tokio?
Yes. Axum serves through Hyper on Tokio, and Actix Web is fully Tokio-compatible; its README shows both #[actix_web::main] and #[tokio::main] entry points.
Which one is easier for AI coding agents?
Both compile-check handlers the same way. Axum's plain function routing and Tower middleware give agents fewer framework-specific macros to get right, while Actix Web's attribute macros keep route definitions next to handlers. Either works well as long as the agent runs cargo check, clippy and tests after every change.
More architecture comparisons
View allLoco vs Axum
Loco vs plain Axum: a Rails-style Rust framework with generators, SeaORM, workers and mailers, or a thin router where you pick every crate yourself.
AFFiNE vs AppFlowy
AFFiNE vs AppFlowy compared on architecture: React + Yjs vs Flutter + Rust, local-first storage, sync servers, native code and local AI.
Appsmith vs ToolJet vs Budibase
Appsmith, ToolJet and Budibase compared on architecture: Java vs NestJS vs Koa, MongoDB vs PostgreSQL vs CouchDB, sandboxing, plugins and deployment.
Authelia vs authentik vs Logto
Authelia, authentik and Logto compared on architecture: Go vs Django vs Koa, storage, OIDC providers, protocol support and how each fits a self-hosted stack.