In my last post I talked about Times New Roman alternatives because (a) everyone has access to Times New Roman and (b) it has alternatives that are both superior and readily available.

Now I’m going to talk about some alternatives to Frutiger because (a) very few people have access to Frutiger and (b) it is an excellent typeface that is also one of my all-time favorites.

Graphic titled ‘Frutiger’ with the phrase ‘Multivac QA1’ shown in large letters in the middle. A few features of this typeface are called-out: higher x-height, square dots, double storey lowercase ‘a’, open apertures, diagonal serif on the digit ‘1’, low bar on the uppercase ‘A’, stroke only below circle on the uppercase ‘Q’, and centre stroke descends to base on the uppercase ‘M’.

Why an alternative?

If Frutiger is such a great typeface, why even talk about alternatives? Shouldn’t I just recommend that people go out and buy a license to Frutiger itself?

*sigh* I wish.

Unlike Helvetica, Times New Roman, Baskerville, and Garamond, none of the operating systems or word processors that we all use today license Frutiger to its users at no additional cost. If you want to use Frutiger, you have go buy it for yourself.

And there’s the rub. Here are the current prices for Frutiger in US Dollars:

Frutiger (19 font family): $532
Frutiger Next (21 font family): $846
Frutiger Neue (40 font family): $846

So, yeah. Unless you have a lot of money lying around or you’re a designer for whom this type of business expense makes sense, it’s best to look for an alternative.

Screenshot from the MyFonts.com website showing the Frutiger Next family with individual styles from $83.28 and the complete family of 21 fonts for $846.84.

But why Frutiger?

Why make all this effort for Frutiger? Aren’t the typefaces that come with Windows, macOS, Microsoft Office, and LibreOffice enough?

Well, yes. You could live your life using only the typefaces you get out of the box – and those are excellent typefaces. But where’s the fun in looking like everyone else in the world? :)

And to explain the “why Frutiger?” bit, let’s talk about its design.

Why Frutiger looks the way it does

Frutiger was designed Adrian Frutiger in 1972 as a wayfinding typeface for Roissy Airport (now Charles de Gaulle Airport) in Paris, France. A few years later, in 1976, it was released publicly as a commercially available typeface.

But Frutiger comes from a much older tradition of ‘grotesk’ (ie sans serif) typefaces.

One of the original grotesks is Akzidenz Grotesk from 1898. This typeface heavily influenced Helvetica and Univers, with the latter having been designed by Adrian Frutiger himself. Both Helvetica and Univers were instant hits when they were released in 1957 and you still see them everywhere these days.

Graphic showing the phrase ‘Multivac QA1’ in large text in Akzidenz Grotesk, Helvetica, and Univers. There are arrows pointing from Akzidenz Grotesk to both Helvetica and Universe.

Another older grotesk is Johnston (1916) and this is what the hugely popular Gill Sans (1926) is based on. Gill Sans is the friendly typeface you see in the London Underground and on things like Penguin Books.

When Adrian Frutiger created his Frutiger typeface, he based it on “the rationality and cleanliness of Univers” and “the organic and proportional aspects of Gill Sans”. [1]

Graphic showing the phrase ‘Multivac QA1’ in large text in Univers, Gill Sans, and Frutiger. There are arrows pointing from both Universe and Gill Sans to Frutiger.

Frutiger is the best of both worlds

That combination is what I love about Frutiger:

It feels somewhat rational, which in typeface design parlance refers to vertical shapes and closed apertures (eg openings in letters like the lowercase ‘c’). It gets this vibe from Univers, Helvetica, and Akzidenz Grotesk.
But it also feels organic, meaning more handwriting-like and with open apertures. It gets this vibe from Gill Sans.

You don’t get that combination of vibes from typefaces like Helvetica, Arial, Verdana, and the like – all of which feel mostly neutral and rational, maybe even cold and impersonal.

Frutiger is upright and authoritative, yes, but it also feels somewhat warm and friendly – all while remaining highly legible and readable at all sizes.

Two official versions of digital Frutiger

I should mention that there are two official, modern versions of the digital Frutiger typeface: Neue Frutiger and Frutiger Next. Both were design by, or co-designed with, Adrian Frutiger and both have their uses.

Neue Frutiger (2009) is closer to the 1976 public release. This is what you should use if you want an expanded digital version of the original.

Frutiger Next (1999) is a modernised version of the original with a higher x-height, narrower letterspacing, more pronounced ascenders, and true italics (italics that look calligraphic, as opposed to italics that are just oblique version of the regular, upright letterforms). This is what you should use if you’re going to set Frutiger in large blocks of text.

Graphic showing two text blocks, one set in Neue Frutiger and the other set in Frutiger Next. The text in Neue Frutiger is wider and larger. .

With that out of the way, let’s talk about alternatives.

Large-foundry alternatives

If we’re not going to spend over eight hundred dollars on Frutiger, regardless of how much we love it, what are our options?

The first thing I do in situations like this is see if any large foundries have typefaces that are similar. And, as it happens…

Myriad Pro from Adobe

Myriad from Adobe is a friendlier and slightly more elegant version of Frutiger. It was released in 1992 and Apple started using it in its logo and corporate design in 2002.

You can buy the Myriad Pro 10-font family for US$353 or the complete 40-font Myriad family for US$1,413. So the normal Myriad Pro family is already a much more affordable option.

Segoe and Segoe UI from Monotype

Segoe from Agfa Monotype (now Monotype Imaging) is another friendlier and slightly more elegant version of Frutiger. Microsoft started using Segoe in its logo and corporate design in 2003.

Unfortunately, Segoe isn’t available for sale. But if you’re a Windows user, there is a sub-family of Segoe called Segoe UI that you can use right now for free.

Graphic showing four short text blocks that are set in Neue Frutiger, Frutiger Next, Myriad Pro, and Segoe UI. There are comments written under each heading. Under Neue Frutiger the comment reads, “Closer to the original”. Under Frutiger Next the comment reads, “Modernised, with true italics”. Under Myriad Pro the comment reads, “Friendlier version of Frutiger Next”. Under Segoe UI the comment reads, “Friendlier Frutiger Next, optimised for UI”.

Both Myriad and Segoe UI are closer to the design of Frutiger Next, the more modernised version of Frutiger. And both take things a step in the friendlier direction, with features like the rounded dot in the lowercase ‘i’ and the more curved stroke in the uppercase ‘Q’. Segoe UI is also optimized for user interfaces (UI) so its letterspacing is a bit wider.

Graphic showing the phrase ‘Multivac QA1’ in large text in Neue Frutiger (2009), Frutiger Next (1999), Myriad Pro (1992), and Segoe UI (2003).

So, if you want a more affordable, slightly friendlier version of Frutiger Next, then Myriad Pro is a decent alternative. I myself love Myriad Pro. In fact, the headings in this blog are set in Myriad Pro Condensed.

I would not, however, recommend Segoe UI as a general-purpose alternative to Frutiger. It is awkward to use for anything other than user interfaces. And if you do want to use it, you’ll have to make a bunch of manual tweaks (like tighter letterspacing) and this might be too much of a hassle for most people.

Graphic showing four text blocks that are set in Neue Frutiger, Frutiger Next, Myriad Pro, and Segoe UI. The text set in Myriad Pro and Segoe UI looks more like the text set in Frutiger Next than the text set in Neue Frutiger.

Free alternatives

The next thing I do when looking for alternatives is to see if there are any free ones available.

You can sometimes get:

Close-enough alternatives from type designers and independent type foundries that you can use in certain designs.
Open-source versions (some even drop-in replacements) of older typefaces that aren’t under copyright. (Sometimes these modern versions are even better than the originals, like in the case of Times New Roman.)
Multilingual versions created by multilingual type designers and type foundries with support for their specific languages.

Frutiger has one-and-a-half of these.

Hind from Indian Type Foundry

Hind is a version of Frutiger Next created by Indian Type Foundry that supports the Devanagari and Latin scripts. However this typeface is optimised for use in user interfaces and it has no italics, so it’s not good for general-purpose use.

If you need a Frutiger version for signage and UI, then this might work for you.

Roboto from Google

Roboto is a “Frankenfont” that borrows heavily from the Helvetica, Myriad, Univers, FF DIN, and Ronnia typefaces – though its v2.0 is more unified in its design [2]. It was developed completely inhouse at Google [3].

While only parts of Roboto borrow from Univers and Myriad (both of which are related to Frutiger), if you needed a non-Helvetica, non-Arial, general-purpose typeface, Roboto is a reasonable choice.

Graphic showing the phrase ‘Multivac QA1’ in large text in Neue Frutiger, Frutiger Next, Hind, and Robot.

That said, I would not recommend Hind or Roboto to most people who are looking for Frutiger alternatives: Hind because it’s not a complete, general-purpose typeface and Roboto because it’s not really Frutiger. (Also because Roboto is the most-used Google Font and we’re, you know, trying to not follow the crowd here.)

Smaller-foundry alternatives

Our last option is typefaces with designs inspired by Frutiger that have been created by smaller type foundries.

Epoca by Hoftype

Epoca is a slightly more elegant version of Frutiger Next. It is the only typeface inspired by Frutiger that keeps the square dot over the lowercase ‘i’ and ‘j’. But then it adds design features like a slightly slanted upward stroke on the uppercase ‘M’ and a higher cross-bar on the uppercase ‘A’. So not quite Frutiger, but close enough.

You can buy the Epoca 8-font family for US$307. If you think Myriad is too modern and friendly (round dots!) and you want to spend $50 less, then this typeface is for you.

Fact by Paratype

Fact is a friendlier version of Frutiger Next, complete with round dots. What’s cool about this typeface is that it’s a full type system of 98 fonts across six weights – plus a variable font – that supports 100 languages.

You can buy the Fact Normal 16-font family right now for just US$23 from MyFonts. Or you can buy its complete 98-font family from Paratype for US$330.

Graphic showing the phrase ‘Multivac QA1’ in large text in Neue Frutiger, Frutiger Next, Epoca, and Fact.

My recommendation

What would I recommend as an alternative to Frutiger then?

Well I wouldn’t recommend any of the free alternatives. Out-of-copyright typefaces like Franklin Gothic (1912) have excellent open-source versions like Libre Franklin. Typefaces like Frutiger do not.

I’d be tempted to recommend Myriad. It’s a more modern and, dare I say it, slightly cooler version of Frutiger Next. But its regular, 10-font family costs US$353 and its complete, 40-font family costs US$1,413. Epoca is more cost effective (US$307 for its 10-font family), but I haven’t used so I don’t have any personal experience with it. It does have a slightly different vibe from Frutiger though.

So the only alternative I would recommend is, in fact, Fact. Fact fits somewhere between Neue Frutiger and Frutiger Next, and its design is subtly cool in its own way. It’s Normal, 16-font family currently costs a measly US$26 and you can get its complete, 98-font family for US$330 – which $23 is less than just the regular version of Myriad!

Fact is very readable at all sizes and, because it has so many weights in its narrower and expanded variations, you can fit it into pretty much whatever it is that you’re doing.

Graphic showing four text blocks that are set in Neue Frutiger, Frutiger Next, Myriad Pro, and Segoe UI. The text set in Myriad Pro looks more like the text set in Frutiger Next than the text set in Neue Frutiger. The text set in Fact looks to be somewhere between the text set in Frutiger Next and Neue Frutiger.

I’ve been using Fact since last year and it has quickly become my go-to typeface for a whole range of uses.

Will I still purchase Frutiger if I, like, win the lottery or get a big bonus at work? Absolutely. Though even then I’ll likely end up using both Fact and Frutiger in different situations. But I’m happy with where I am right now and I am no longer hankering for Frutiger like I used to in the past.

Concluding thoughts

I had a lot of fun research, compiling, and writing this. I’m afraid that means you’ll see more of these types of posts in the future. Hopefully not too many – I know most of you aren’t typography nerds like I am! – but we’ll see how we go.

Let me know if there’s a typeface you want me to dive into in a future post. I’m happy to take requests :)

In the meantime, have fun with your typography!