Both Hamlet and Macbeth (the plays) are considered tragedies and both main characters

are considered tragic heroes so you might begin there with your comparison. One of
Hamlet's problems in the play is that he takes a long time to seek the revenge he promised
his father's ghost that he would seek. He tends to overthink matters. Macbeth, on the
other hand, tends to act very quickly and rashly. Hamlet is a generally likeable character
and dies a heroic death having finally fulfilled the promise to his father's ghost. Macbeth
however, dies a far less noble death as he is considered a murderous tyrant by the end of
the play. I suggest that you follow the links below for further help.

One way of looking at it is through the lens of honor. Both Macbeth and Hamlet fight and
ultimately are killed, but only one is honorable-- Hamlet. While Macbeth kills many
people in pursuit of becoming King, Hamlet delays killing his Uncle because of
philosophical concerns and doubts about what is the right thing to do and how to do it.
Hamlet finally is able to avenge his father's death, but dies honorably in the process. In
contrast, Macbeth also dies, and although he does die in battle on the battlefield it can not
be called an honorable death as he has caused the deaths of so many other people purely
for his own potential benefit.
One thing they have in common is that their journeys, both of which end in blood and
death, start with something mystical-- Hamlet with the ghost of his father, and Macbeth
with the witches.

William Shakespeare's two famous plays Hamlet and Macbeth are both named
after the main characters in the play. Although sharing many similar themes (such as a
murderous king and those who wish to overthrow him) Young Hamlet and Macbeth
themselves are quite different from each other. The first difference that leaps out when
one looks back after completing both plays, is that the two main characters play different
roles in their respective stories.
In Macbeth, Macbeth himself was the antagonist in the story: the "bad guy" so to
speak. He began as a loyal servant of the king, but his greed, stoked by his wife and left
unchecked by his conscience led to his murder and betrayal of not only the king, but also
his former friend and comrade Banquo, and the family of his friend Macduff. Hamlet on
the other hand, was the protagonist in his story: the "good guy" whom the reader wants
(or at least whom Shakespeare planned for them to want) to succeed in the end. He was
also a murderer, but for a different reason. Like Macbeth, a close family member led him
to commit murder. But in Hamlet's case it was the ghost of his father, and revenge, not
greed, was his motive. He was trying to bring justice to an unjust king, and so he was
more of an avenging angel then a murderous demon, something Macbeth was likened to
by his peers. But Macbeth should have known better.
Macbeth was an older, wiser man who had had years of experience in a range of
activities from politics to war. When he planned to murder the king, he knew exactly
what type of action he was about to take, and what the consequences would be. Yet in
spite of (or maybe due to) this knowledge, Macbeth acted very rashly and foolishly, and
did not take the time to use his great wisdom for his benefit. He also wanted to avoid
killing the king, and did not have the courage to go through with his plan until his wife
scolded and insulted him. Hamlet on the other hand did not really know what he was
getting into. He was much younger, and it seemed he had lived more of a protected life
(he was a student, not a politician or a soldier.) It seems it was because of this naivety
that Hamlet seemed very committed to the actions he was going about to take but still
feared the repercussions, because he did not know what they might be. Despite his lack of
experience in covert assassinations, Hamlet did not act very foolishly. He feigned
insanity, thereby causing everybody in his way to let his or her guard down. Yet in the
end, neither Hamlet nor Macbeth was wise enough to prevent his own demise.
Macbeth's tragic flaw was that he was a seemingly good man who entertained
thoughts of grandeur to the point where he decided he deserved such greatness. He
allowed his greed to manifest itself in the upper tiers of his mind instead of pushing it
back like he had before. When he took this avarice to the pointof murder, it snowballed
out of control down a hill that ultimately ended with him dead. Hamlet's flaw on the other
hand was even more tragic, because it was perhaps "the right thing to do." Hamlet let his
lust for vengeance go too far though and it blinded him to the dangers that were lurking
around him. By rashly killing Polonius, he showed his hand too soon, and made an
enemy of Laertes, the man who ultimately killed him.
Although they killed for different reasons, it seems that Shakespeare perhaps saw
any flaw that led to murder was a tragic one. Murder is truly a quick way of making
enemies, and in both stories, the main character was slain by a family member of people
they killed. Although both plays had a similar premise, Shakespeare managed to give
Macbeth and Young Hamlet very different mindsets and personalities so that their
journey to ruin was kept original and interesting. He told both stories from a different
perspective by giving a point of view from both the victim and the offender, which
consequently led each character to have a unique flaw that led to his destruction.