Lato vs Open Sans

Two sans-serif faces, set live below in their own letters — then the honest take on which to pick and when.

The quick brown fox 0123456789

Latosans-serif

Łukasz Dziedzic · 2010 · weights 300, 400, 700, 900

The quick brown fox 0123456789

Open Sanssans-serif

Steve Matteson · 2011 · weights 300, 400, 600, 700

At a glance

Personality
Warm, semi-condensed
Neutral, open
Body legibility
Very good
Excellent
Heaviest weight
900 (Black)
700 (Bold)
Designer
Łukasz Dziedzic, 2010
Steve Matteson, 2011

LatoOpen Sans

The honest take

Two humanist sans-serifs from the early 2010s that both became default body faces for a generation of websites. Open Sans (Steve Matteson, 2011) is the more openly neutral of the pair — upright, unhurried, drawn for maximum on-screen legibility and endlessly safe across blogs, dashboards and documents. Lato (Łukasz Dziedzic, 2010) carries a little more warmth and character: subtly rounded terminals and a semi-condensed feel that give paragraphs a gentle personality. For pure, get-out-of-the-way body text and forms, Open Sans is the surer default. For a corporate or portfolio voice that wants to feel approachable without shouting, Lato's warmth pays off. Lato also reaches a true black 900 weight for display lines, where Open Sans tops out at 700.

The x-ray

Same size, same baseline — Lato over Open Sans. Where they agree the strokes merge; where they argue, fringes.

Hamburgefonstiv

“Hamburgefonstiv” is the type designer's test word — it carries most of the shapes that give a face away.

Read more

More about each face: Lato · Open Sans