HTMX vs Alpine.js: When to Use Which

Feb 4, 2026 · 3 min read

You’re building a server-rendered application and want to add interactivity without adopting React or Vue. Two tools keep appearing in discussions: HTMX and Alpine.js. The confusion is understandable—both use HTML attributes, both avoid build steps, and both promise lightweight solutions. But they solve fundamentally different problems.

This guide clarifies when to use HTMX, when to use Alpine.js, and when combining them makes sense.

Key Takeaways

HTMX handles server-driven interactivity by making requests and swapping HTML fragments, while Alpine.js manages client-side reactivity and local UI state.
Use HTMX for CRUD operations, partial page updates, and server-side validation. Use Alpine.js for dropdowns, modals, client-side filtering, and integrating JavaScript libraries.
Combining both tools works well but requires careful handling of DOM lifecycle issues—Alpine state disappears when HTMX swaps content.
Neither tool suits complex client-side state synchronization, offline-first apps, or highly interactive interfaces like collaborative editors.

The Core Distinction: Server-Driven vs Client-Side Interactivity

The choice between HTMX and Alpine.js comes down to where your interaction logic lives.

HTMX extends HTML to make server requests and swap DOM content. It treats the server as the source of truth, returning HTML fragments rather than JSON. Your server renders the UI, and HTMX handles the transport.

Alpine.js provides client-side reactivity through HTML attributes. It manages local state, handles UI toggles, and responds to user events—all without server involvement.

These aren’t competing tools. They address different layers of web application behavior.

When to Use HTMX

HTMX excels when your interactivity depends on server data. Consider it for:

CRUD operations and data persistence. Loading a list of items, submitting forms, updating records—any interaction where the server owns the data benefits from HTMX’s approach. The server renders the updated HTML, and HTMX swaps it into place.

Partial page updates. Instead of full page reloads, HTMX can replace specific sections. A search results panel, a comments section, or a notification badge can update independently.

Server-side validation and business logic. When validation rules live on the server, HTMX lets you return error messages as rendered HTML rather than coordinating JSON responses with client-side rendering.

HTMX requires backend control. You need endpoints that return HTML fragments, not JSON. If you’re consuming a third-party API that only speaks JSON, HTMX alone won’t help.

When to Use Alpine.js

Alpine.js handles interactions that don’t need the server. Use it for:

UI state management. Dropdowns, modals, accordions, tabs—these exist purely in the browser. Asking the server whether a menu is open adds latency without value.

Client-side filtering and sorting. If you’ve already loaded data, Alpine can filter or reorder it instantly. No network round-trip required.

Integrating JavaScript libraries. Charts, date pickers, drag-and-drop interfaces—Alpine’s lifecycle hooks simplify wiring up third-party libraries.

Alpine maintains state in x-data attributes and reacts to changes automatically. It’s JavaScript, but constrained to HTML attributes, keeping behavior close to markup.

Using HTMX and Alpine Together

The combination works well when you need both server communication and client-side polish. A typical pattern: HTMX loads data from the server, and Alpine handles local UI interactions on that data.

However, integration requires awareness of lifecycle behavior. When HTMX swaps DOM content, any Alpine state in the replaced elements disappears. If you’re swapping a region that contains Alpine components, you have two options:

Reinitialize Alpine on the new content. This works when the swapped content should start fresh.
Use morphing instead of replacement. Alpine’s Morph plugin and HTMX’s morphing extensions can preserve state during updates, though this adds complexity.

Don’t assume the combination is frictionless. Test how your Alpine state behaves when HTMX modifies the DOM.

Decision Framework

Ask these questions:

Does this interaction require server data? Use HTMX.
Is this purely client-side UI behavior? Use Alpine.js.
Do you need both server data and local state? Combine them, but plan for DOM lifecycle issues.
Are you consuming JSON-only APIs without backend control? Alpine.js (or vanilla JavaScript) handles this better than HTMX.

What These Tools Won’t Solve

Neither HTMX nor Alpine.js suits every project. Complex client-side state synchronization, offline-first applications, or highly interactive interfaces (think collaborative editors or games) may still warrant heavier frameworks. These tools optimize for simplicity in server-rendered contexts, not universal applicability.

Conclusion

HTMX and Alpine.js complement each other because they target different concerns. HTMX manages server-driven interactivity—fetching and swapping HTML. Alpine.js handles client-side reactivity—local state and UI behavior.

Choose based on where your logic belongs. For most server-rendered applications, you’ll find HTMX covers the majority of interactions, with Alpine filling gaps where client-only behavior improves the experience. Start with the simpler tool for each task, and combine them deliberately when the situation demands it.

FAQs

HTMX requires server endpoints that return HTML fragments. You need some backend, whether a full framework like Django or Rails, a simple server with Node.js or Python, or even serverless functions. The key requirement is endpoints that respond with HTML, not JSON.

Yes. Alpine.js initializes on page load and attaches to existing HTML. Server-rendered pages work perfectly—Alpine reads x-data attributes from the markup and makes those elements reactive. No special server configuration needed.

Use HTMX for server-side validation by returning error messages as HTML fragments. Use Alpine.js for instant client-side feedback like checking required fields or format validation before submission. Combining both gives users immediate feedback while ensuring server-side rules are enforced.

Both libraries are small. HTMX is around 14KB minified and gzipped, Alpine.js around 15KB. Together they're still smaller than most JavaScript frameworks. Performance impact is minimal for typical server-rendered applications.

Gain Debugging Superpowers

Unleash the power of session replay to reproduce bugs, track slowdowns and uncover frustrations in your app. Get complete visibility into your frontend with OpenReplay — the most advanced open-source session replay tool for developers. Check our GitHub repo and join the thousands of developers in our community.