Founders often hear “we’ll use React” and don’t realize that how React is hosted—classic SPA vs Next.js—changes SEO, speed, and long‑term cost.

The mental model

React alone (SPA): one JS bundle, client‑rendered routes. Great for logged‑in apps where SEO barely matters.
Next.js: React + routing + server capabilities + static generation when you want it. Strong for marketing pages, docs, and mixed public/private apps.

If your homepage must rank and load fast on mobile, Next.js is usually the default today—not because React is “bad,” but because you get sensible defaults for HTML, metadata, and images.

When a SPA is still fine

Internal tools and admin dashboards behind login.
Prototypes where SEO is irrelevant and speed of iteration wins.
Tight embedding inside another shell where you don’t control hosting.

When Next.js pays for itself early

Landing pages and blogs that must be indexed and shared cleanly on social.
Content that changes often and benefits from ISR or server rendering.
Teams that want one codebase for marketing + light authenticated areas.

Hidden maintenance costs

SPAs can grow expensive in perf audits and “glue” libraries. Next.js adds framework surface area but reduces bespoke setup for routing, image optimization, and scripts—often a net win for small teams.

Picking for your roadmap

If your next 12 months include public SEO content or paid acquisition, bias to Next.js. If you are 100% in‑app and have a separate marketing site elsewhere, React SPA may stay appropriate.

Building both marketing and product? Browse pricing if you want to align scope before you commit to a stack—or contact me for a short architecture pass.