Link copied to clipboard

# Font Awesome vs Material Design for Bootstrap Comparison - What are their main differences?

Share
[
Export
](/compare/font-awesome/material-design-for-bootstrap/export.csv)

Font AwesomeMaterial Design for Bootstrap[+ Add Product](#)

Reviews

**Font Awesome** [

4.5/5(34)

](https://www.g2.com/products/font-awesome/reviews#reviews)

**Material Design for Bootstrap** [

4.6/5(25)

](https://www.g2.com/products/material-design-for-bootstrap/reviews#reviews)

Pricing

**Font Awesome**
No pricing available

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
No pricing available

**Pricing Insights**
from reviews

Time to Implement

**Font Awesome**
Not enough reviews yet

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
Not enough reviews yet

Return on Investment

**Font Awesome**
Not enough reviews yet

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
Not enough reviews yet

Perceived Cost

**Font Awesome**
$$$$$

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
$$$$$

Average Discount

**Font Awesome**
Not enough reviews yet

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
Not enough reviews yet

Pros & Cons

**Font Awesome**
Not enough data

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
Not enough data

Integrations

**Font Awesome**
Not enough data

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
[

 ![Product Avatar Image](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/large_detail/large_detail_f5f9a0d4b3796e3330f0f1489af26c6f/copy-ui.png "Product Avatar Image")

Copy UI

](https://www.g2.com/products/copy-ui/reviews)[
View all
](https://www.g2.com/products/material-design-for-bootstrap/integrations)

Ratings

Meets Requirements

**Font Awesome**

8.6

8.630

**Material Design for Bootstrap**

9.1

9.120

Ease of Use

**Font Awesome**

8.9

8.930

**Material Design for Bootstrap**

8.9

8.922

Ease of Setup

**Font Awesome**

8.7

8.79

**Material Design for Bootstrap**

9.3

9.35

Ease of Admin

**Font Awesome**

8.3

8.35

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
Not enough data

Quality of Support

**Font Awesome**

8.5

8.526

**Material Design for Bootstrap**

8.6

8.617

Has the product been a good partner in doing business?

**Font Awesome**
Not enough data

**Material Design for Bootstrap**
Not enough data

Product Direction (% positive)

**Font Awesome**

9.2

9.230

**Material Design for Bootstrap**

9.4

9.421

User Insights

Reviewers' Company Size

[![Font Awesome](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_133f6e1711beecafd50aa4f3c1e99e03/font-awesome.jpg "Font Awesome")](https://www.g2.com/products/font-awesome/reviews)

Font Awesome

Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)

69.7%

Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)

12.1%

Enterprise(\> 1000 emp.)

18.2%

[![Material Design for Bootstrap](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_011d4070ca286cd9ea89a9b318384d21/material-design-for-bootstrap.jpg "Material Design for Bootstrap")](https://www.g2.com/products/material-design-for-bootstrap/reviews)

Material Design for Bootstrap

Small-Business(50 or fewer emp.)

86.4%

Mid-Market(51-1000 emp.)

13.6%

Enterprise(\> 1000 emp.)

0%

Small-Business

(50 or fewer emp.)

69.7%

86.4%

Mid-Market

(51-1000 emp.)

12.1%

13.6%

Enterprise

(\> 1000 emp.)

18.2%

0%

Reviewers' Industry

[![Font Awesome](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_133f6e1711beecafd50aa4f3c1e99e03/font-awesome.jpg "Font Awesome")](https://www.g2.com/products/font-awesome/reviews)
Font Awesome

Computer Software

21.2%

Information Technology and Services

18.2%

Design

12.1%

Telecommunications

9.1%

Marketing and Advertising

6.1%

Other

33.3%

[![Material Design for Bootstrap](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_011d4070ca286cd9ea89a9b318384d21/material-design-for-bootstrap.jpg "Material Design for Bootstrap")](https://www.g2.com/products/material-design-for-bootstrap/reviews)
Material Design for Bootstrap

Computer Software

31.8%

Leisure, Travel & Tourism

18.2%

Consulting

9.1%

Marketing and Advertising

9.1%

Oil & Energy

4.5%

Other

27.3%

FAQs

## Font Awesome vs Material Design for Bootstrap FAQs

Generated using AI

Last updated: August 16, 2026

### What is the difference between Material Design for Bootstrap vs Font Awesome?

Material Design for Bootstrap stands out for its higher Ease of Setup and Quality of Support scores, while Font Awesome is favored for its extensive icon library and ease of integration.

| [Material Design for Bootstrap](https://www.g2.com/products/material-design-for-bootstrap/reviews) | [Font Awesome](https://www.g2.com/products/font-awesome/reviews) |
| --- | --- |
| 4.6/5 (25 reviews) | 4.5/5 (34 reviews) |
| Small-Business | Small-Business |
| 9.3 | 8.7 |
| 8.6 | 8.5 |
| Modern design elements, rapid UI development, strong documentation | Extensive icon library, simple integration, customizable icons |

### How do the pricing models of Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome compare?

Material Design for Bootstrap is rated higher on value, with reviewers expressing greater satisfaction with its pricing compared to Font Awesome.

- **Material Design for Bootstrap:** In recent reviews, many highlight the free version as feature-rich and effective, with the paid version seen as a worthwhile investment for additional features.
- **Font Awesome:** Recent reviewers note that the introduction of a premium subscription reduced the number of free icons, and some consider the premium features overpriced relative to the value provided.
- **Switching reasons:** Reviewers mention switching to Material Design for Bootstrap for its broader free feature set and to Font Awesome for its icon variety, but cost is a recurring consideration for both.

### What are the best alternatives to Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome?

The top three alternatives to Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome are JQuery UI, handlebars, and Datatables.

| Product | G2 Rating (reviews) | Largest Segment | Pricing Insight | Top Reviewer-Cited Strength |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Material Design for Bootstrap](https://www.g2.com/products/material-design-for-bootstrap/reviews) | 4.6/5 (25 reviews) | Small-Business | Free version is feature-rich, paid version adds value | Modern design elements, rapid UI development |
| [Font Awesome](https://www.g2.com/products/font-awesome/reviews) | 4.5/5 (34 reviews) | Small-Business | Premium tier seen as overpriced by some reviewers | Extensive icon library, simple integration |
| [JQuery UI](https://www.g2.com/products/jquery-ui/reviews) | 3.6/5 (28 reviews) | Small-Business | — | Customizable UI widgets for web applications |
| [handlebars](https://www.g2.com/products/handlebars/reviews) | 3.9/5 (13 reviews) | — | — | Template engine for dynamic HTML generation |
| [Datatables](https://www.g2.com/products/datatables/reviews) | 4.6/5 (20 reviews) | Small-Business | — | Advanced table features and data manipulation |

### Which Other Web Frameworks features should I prioritize when comparing Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome?

Buyers should prioritize Ease of Setup, Quality of Support, Meets Requirements, Ease of Use, and Pricing Satisfaction when comparing Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome.

- **Ease of Setup:** Material Design for Bootstrap 9.3, Font Awesome 8.7
- **Quality of Support:** Material Design for Bootstrap 8.6, Font Awesome 8.5
- **Meets Requirements:** Material Design for Bootstrap 9.1, Font Awesome 8.6
- **Ease of Use:** Both products score 8.9
- **Pricing Satisfaction:** Material Design for Bootstrap is favored for its free feature set, while Font Awesome receives mixed feedback on premium value

### What are the pros and cons of Material Design for Bootstrap vs Font Awesome?

Material Design for Bootstrap's headline strength is rapid UI development with modern design, while Font Awesome excels with its extensive icon library and ease of integration.

- **Material Design for Bootstrap strengths:** Modern design elements, rapid UI development, strong documentation, responsive design, and abundant templates.
- **Material Design for Bootstrap trade-offs:** Some reviewers mention the premium version is necessary for full features, and customization can be complex for non-developers.
- **Font Awesome strengths:** Extensive icon library, simple integration via CDN or HTML, customizable icons, and compatibility with multiple frameworks.
- **Font Awesome trade-offs:** Reviewers note a reduction in free icons after the introduction of premium tiers, and some consider the premium features overpriced or lacking in value.

### Is Material Design for Bootstrap or Font Awesome better for small businesses?

Material Design for Bootstrap is the better fit for small businesses, as both products are most popular in this segment but reviewers highlight its rapid setup and strong free feature set.

- **Material Design for Bootstrap:** Small-Business is the largest segment, with reviewers praising its ease of use, rapid development, and value for small teams.
- **Font Awesome:** Small-Business is also the largest segment, with reviewers appreciating its icon variety and ease of integration, but some express concerns about premium pricing for small teams.

### Which Other Web Frameworks platform has better integrations?

Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome are rated at parity for integrations, with reviewers citing broad compatibility but no specific third-party integration dominance.

- **Material Design for Bootstrap:** Reviewers mention compatibility with Angular, Vue, React, and jQuery, highlighting flexibility across frameworks.
- **Font Awesome:** Reviewers note integration with WordPress, React, Angular, and Odoo, emphasizing ease of adding icons to various platforms.

### How do Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome compare on customer support?

Material Design for Bootstrap and Font Awesome are at near-parity on Quality of Support, with scores of 8.6 and 8.5 respectively, indicating similar reviewer satisfaction.

- **Material Design for Bootstrap:** Reviewers frequently mention responsive support, with solutions often provided within 24 hours and helpful documentation.
- **Font Awesome:** Reviewers describe support as generally helpful, with documentation covering most scenarios and positive experiences with issue resolution.

### Which is easier to implement, Material Design for Bootstrap or Font Awesome?

Material Design for Bootstrap is rated higher for Ease of Setup, with a 9.3 score versus Font Awesome's 8.7, indicating a smoother initial implementation experience.

- **Material Design for Bootstrap:** Reviewers highlight quick setup, easy learning curve, and rapid integration into projects, especially for those familiar with Bootstrap.
- **Font Awesome:** Reviewers note simple integration via CDN or HTML, but mention a minor learning curve for new users and some setup complexity with advanced features.

Alternatives

**Font Awesome Alternatives**

 ![handlebars](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_d614e67c267b3180d9e57fef0fda346f/handlebars.png "handlebars")

[
handlebars
](/products/handlebars/reviews)

 ![IHP](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/hd_favicon/a413dec3607ff3e613ecd8d4aa45e80f/ihp.svg "IHP")

[
IHP
](/products/ihp/reviews)

 ![Ruby on Rails](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_10e24e60adf1cea0d13cea08a31426ad/ruby-on-rails.png "Ruby on Rails")

[
Ruby on Rails
](/products/ruby-on-rails/reviews)

 ![Datatables](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_01f10092d234ba97769716870beb1eb1/datatables.jpeg "Datatables")

[
Datatables
](/products/datatables/reviews)

**Material Design for Bootstrap Alternatives**

 ![JQuery UI](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_fc701efd1efff78ed459a71a79633040/jquery-ui.png "JQuery UI")

[
JQuery UI
](/products/jquery-ui/reviews)

 ![Datatables](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_01f10092d234ba97769716870beb1eb1/datatables.jpeg "Datatables")

[
Datatables
](/products/datatables/reviews)

 ![IHP](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/hd_favicon/a413dec3607ff3e613ecd8d4aa45e80f/ihp.svg "IHP")

[
IHP
](/products/ihp/reviews)

 ![GWT - Google Web Toolkit](https://images.g2crowd.com/uploads/product/image/thumb_square/thumb_square_baa0a8efb06604be1b5e3f2ce327f2c7/gwt-google-web-toolkit.png "GWT - Google Web Toolkit")

[
GWT - Google Web Toolkit
](/products/gwt-google-web-toolkit/reviews)

## Font Awesome vs Material Design for Bootstrap

- Reviewers felt that Material Design for Bootstrap meets the needs of their business better than Font Awesome.
- When comparing quality of ongoing product support, reviewers felt that Material Design for Bootstrap is the preferred option.
- For feature updates and roadmaps, our reviewers preferred the direction of Material Design for Bootstrap over Font Awesome.