MakerKit is the best Next.js SaaS boilerplate in 2026 for teams that need authentication, subscriptions, multi-tenancy, testing and clear guidance for AI coding agents. Supastarter is a close second and offers the broadest choice of databases, payment providers and deployment routes. ShipFast remains the simplest option for solo developers who value speed and a small codebase over advanced team permissions.

This comparison uses a dedicated documentation-led benchmark for SaaS starter repositories. It does not reuse the DIY AI code-generation scores, because those measure coding assistants rather than the boilerplates they work inside. We reviewed the documented feature coverage, public repository structure, upgrade guidance, and the instructions available for Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.

A SaaS boilerplate is not an AI website builder. Wix and Hostinger generate and host sites through managed visual platforms. A Next.js starter gives developers source code they must modify, deploy and maintain. Readers looking for a managed site should use our best AI website builder comparison. Also, feel free to check out our guide on the best AI hosting solutions.

Best Next.js SaaS boilerplates in 2026: benchmark results

Rank	Boilerplate	Score	Rating	Best for	Main trade-off
1	MakerKit	9.3/10	4.7/5 stars	Structured, production-focused SaaS products	Steeper learning curve
2	Supastarter	9.2/10	4.6/5 stars	Flexible database and billing requirements	Upstream merges become harder after customisation
3	Achromatic	8.9/10	4.5/5 stars	Better Auth, Drizzle and organisation-based apps	Shorter public track record
4	ShipFast	8.1/10	4.1/5 stars	Solo founders launching quickly	Less complete for permissions and testing
5	SaaS Boilerplate by ixartz	8.0/10	4.0/5 stars	Open-source inspection and testing	Features vary between free and paid editions

MakerKit provides the strongest guided architecture and explicit AI-agent support. Supastarter gives developers more freedom in their ORM, database, payment, and infrastructure choices. ShipFast scores lower, but it can still be the better purchase for a one-person product that does not need organisations or granular permissions.

---

---

How we benchmarked the starter kits

The benchmark covers authentication, billing, database support, team accounts and permissions, transactional email, testing, documentation, deployment, upgrades, code ownership, repository clarity and AI-agent readiness. Scores reflect documented capability and inspectability. They are not presented as production load-test results for private commercial repositories.

Repository clarity matters because coding agents inherit the structure they are given. Predictable feature folders, explicit data access and documented commands help an agent make contained changes. A loose starter increases the risk that an assistant will duplicate billing logic or bypass an authorisation check. Our Claude AI for coding guide explains why repository context becomes decisive during larger tasks.

MakerKit: best Next.js SaaS boilerplate overall

MakerKit ranks first because its Next.js starter treats SaaS infrastructure as a connected system. The current Supabase kit includes personal and team workspaces, role-based permissions, invitations, subscription billing, an admin area, email packages and Playwright tests inside a Turborepo structure.

It is the strongest option for a B2B product where account boundaries and billing ownership must remain explicit. The Supabase version uses PostgreSQL and row-level security for tenant isolation. MakerKit also offers Prisma and Drizzle variants for teams that prefer a self-hosted data layer. Its documentation includes common commands, package boundaries, upgrade guides and rules for Claude Code, Cursor and Windsurf.

MakerKit pros	MakerKit cons
Strong authentication, billing and multi-tenant account model.Detailed database, testing and production documentation. Clear packages give coding agents useful boundaries. Documented major-version migration paths.	Heavier than a small solo product may need. The main kit requires Supabase and RLS knowledge. Shared-package changes can complicate upgrades. Production still involves several external services.

Supastarter: best for stack flexibility

Supastarter scores 9.2/10 and is the most adaptable commercial option. Its monorepo separates the marketing site, SaaS application, documentation and email preview environment. Authentication uses Better Auth, while the data layer can use Prisma or Drizzle with PostgreSQL and other supported databases.

Billing support includes Stripe, Lemon Squeezy, Creem and Polar. Organisations, invitations, role-based access, an admin UI, and React Email templates suit both individual subscriptions and team products. It also documents several deployment routes and an upstream rebase process. That update path works, but every deep customisation increases the chance of manual merge conflicts.

Supastarter pros	Supastarter cons
Wide choice of databases, ORM and payment providers.Strong organisation, admin and email workflows. Separate applications clarify ownership. Useful multi-platform deployment guidance.	The monorepo is excessive for a basic MVP. Upstream rebases become harder after customisation. Provider flexibility creates more early decisions. Product-specific permissions still need design work.

Achromatic: best modern Drizzle and Better Auth foundation

Achromatic is the strongest alternative for developers who want a current App Router stack built around Better Auth, Drizzle ORM and type-safe APIs. Its documented features include credentials and social authentication, multi-factor authentication, organisations, invitations, Stripe billing, React Email, S3-compatible storage, observability and background tasks.

The codebase aims to minimise unnecessary abstraction while keeping the components that a serious SaaS requires. That should make it easier for a developer or coding agent to follow a feature from the route to the API, database, and interface. Its lower score mainly reflects a less mature public upgrade story than MakerKit or Supastarter.

Achromatic pros	Achromatic cons
Modern Next.js, Better Auth and Drizzle stack.Complete organisation, billing and email foundation.Strong type-safety and maintainability focus.Useful storage and background-task integrations.	Smaller community than established alternatives.Fewer billing provider choices than Supastarter.Upgrade mechanics need checking before purchase. Too broad for some simple consumer products.

ShipFast: best for solo founders and fast launches

ShipFast optimises for a simpler buyer. Its structure covers Next.js, authentication, MongoDB or Supabase, Stripe or Lemon Squeezy, transactional email, landing-page sections, SEO and deployment. JavaScript, TypeScript, App Router and Pages Router variants are available.

A coding agent can quickly understand conventional folders such as /app, /components, /libs and /models. The trade-off is depth. Public documentation does not show the same organisational model, granular permissions, or testing architecture as the leaders’. It is a good fit for a conventional B2C subscription or single-user AI tool, not the strongest base for a complex B2B product.

ShipFast pros	ShipFast cons
Approachable structure for rapid product work. Core auth, billing, email and database integrations. Several routers and language variants. Lifetime updates reduce recurring licence costs.	No clearly documented comprehensive test suite. Team permissions are not its main strength. Stack variants can fragment documentation. Complex products may outgrow the foundation.

SaaS Boilerplate by ixartz: best open-source baseline

The ixartz SaaS Boilerplate is easy to inspect before adoption because its core repository is public. It includes Next.js, Clerk authentication, multi-tenancy, roles, Drizzle ORM, Vitest, Playwright, GitHub Actions, Sentry and a feature-oriented structure. The repository also exposes migrations, tests and release history.

This makes it a useful baseline for teams that prioritise transparency and code ownership. The limitation is edition complexity: Stripe, transactional email and dedicated agent instructions are attached to paid variants rather than consistently present in the free repository.

ixartz SaaS Boilerplate pros	ixartz SaaS Boilerplate cons
A public repository can be reviewed before adoption. Strong testing, CI and monitoring setup.Clear open-source ownership. Feature folders suit humans and agents.	The free edition lacks the full paid feature set. Clerk adds an external authentication dependency. Email and billing depend on the edition. Free, Pro and Max require careful comparison.

Which Next.js Supabase starter should you choose?

MakerKit is the best Next.js Supabase starter when tenant isolation, team workspaces and subscription billing are central. Its migrations, generated types and row-level security policies are part of the application architecture rather than an optional backend layer.

Supastarter is better when Supabase is one infrastructure choice among several. It can connect to Supabase while keeping Better Auth and an ORM-led data layer. ShipFast offers the lightest Supabase route, but buyers should expect to build more of the multi-tenant account model themselves.

How safely can an AI coding agent navigate a boilerplate?

An agent-ready repository has explicit commands, stable package boundaries, visible permissions and tests that fail when behaviour changes. MakerKit leads because it documents AI-agent workflows and separates billing, mail, accounts and database concerns. Supastarter follows with a described monorepo and feature-building recipes.

Before an agent builds a feature, ask it to identify the owning application, data access layer, authorisation check, migration path, and relevant tests. Review that plan before code changes begin. Our AI code refactoring comparison covers how to control large repository changes.

Developers and agents should still follow the Next.js App Router documentation for server and client boundaries, caching and route handling rather than relying entirely on starter-specific patterns.

Testing, deployment and upgrade paths

MakerKit documents unit, database and Playwright workflows. Supastarter includes end-to-end guidance and production checks. Achromatic has a dedicated testing area, while the ixartz repository exposes Vitest, Playwright and CI publicly. ShipFast focuses more on launch tasks than on broad automated testing.

A Vercel deployment may be simple, but databases, webhooks, email, background jobs and storage still need production configuration. Our AI and SaaS hosting guide explains the difference between deploying a Next.js front end and operating the full application stack.

Upgrades are never automatic once the product code diverges from the starter. Keep upstream changes isolated and avoid rewriting core packages without a reason. MakerKit provides migration guidance, Supastarter documents an upstream rebase workflow, and the open-source option exposes releases and changelogs.

Which Next.js SaaS boilerplate should you buy?

Choose MakerKit for a serious multi-tenant SaaS where account boundaries, billing and AI-agent guidance justify a structured foundation. Choose Supastarter when flexibility across databases, payment providers, and deployment platforms matters more than a single preferred stack.

Choose Achromatic for a modern Better Auth and Drizzle architecture. Choose ShipFast when you are a solo founder shipping a conventional paid product. Start with the ixartz boilerplate when public code, testing, and inspectability matter more than including every commercial workflow.

The right starter is the one whose assumptions match the product. Replacing authentication, billing and tenancy after launch is expensive. Removing an unused marketing component is trivial. Prioritise the difficult architectural decisions, then let the coding agent handle product-specific work.

Next.js SaaS boilerplate FAQs

What is the best Next.js SaaS boilerplate in 2026?

MakerKit ranks first in our dedicated benchmark with a score of 9.3/10. It offers the strongest combination of authentication, multi-tenancy, billing, documentation, testing and AI-agent guidance.

Is MakerKit better than ShipFast?

MakerKit is better for team-based SaaS products. ShipFast is easier for a solo founder building a straightforward subscription product without complex roles.

What is the best Next.js Supabase starter?

MakerKit is the strongest Supabase-first option because it combines Supabase Auth, PostgreSQL, row-level security, team accounts and billing.

Can Claude Code or Cursor build on a SaaS boilerplate?

Yes. A boilerplate gives coding agents working patterns to follow. Results are safer when the repository includes instructions, clear package ownership and executable tests.

Do I own the source code?

These products provide modifiable source code, but the licence terms differ. Check redistribution, client-work and update rights before purchase.

Should I use a boilerplate or build from scratch?

Use a boilerplate when its authentication, billing and tenancy model fits the product. Build from scratch when you need to replace major infrastructure before launch.