bulma vs styled-components
Side-by-side comparison of bulma and styled-components
- Weekly Downloads
- 231.7K
- Stars
- 50.1K
- Gzip Size
- 173 B
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 12d ago
- Open Issues
- 517
- Forks
- 3.9K
- Unpacked Size
- 7.0 MB
- Dependencies
- 1
- Weekly Downloads
- 8.1M
- Stars
- 41.0K
- Gzip Size
- 19.8 kB
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 17h ago
- Open Issues
- 336
- Forks
- 2.5K
- Unpacked Size
- 1.8 MB
- Dependencies
- 7
Download Trends
Verdict
Bulma is an excellent choice for developers looking for a minimalist, modern CSS framework that leverages Flexbox. It is particularly suited for projects where a straightforward, standard CSS approach is preferred, making it suitable for teams familiar with traditional CSS methodologies.
On the other hand, styled-components excels in projects that require component-based styling, especially in React applications. Its ability to dynamically style components while ensuring strong type safety makes it ideal for larger applications or teams experienced in JavaScript and React.
Considering trade-offs, those migrating to styled-components may need to adapt to the CSS-in-JS paradigm, which might involve a steeper learning curve for those accustomed to standard CSS frameworks like Bulma. In contrast, Bulma may require additional customization for more complex designs, as it follows more rigid conventions than styled-components.
Detailed Comparison
| Criteria | bulma | styled-components |
|---|---|---|
| License | MIT, commonly used and permissive. | MIT, also widely accepted in the community. |
| Version | 1.0.4 with a focus on traditional CSS techniques. | ✓6.3.9 offers improved features for React integration. |
| Description | Modern CSS framework based on Flexbox. | CSS for the <Component> Age with flexibility and strong typing. |
| Open Issues | 517, which may indicate areas needing improvement. | ✓336, suggesting a more manageable backlog. |
| GitHub Forks | ✓3.9K, indicating active contributions and modifications. | 2.5K, showing community interest but less engagement. |
| GitHub Stars | ✓50.1K, reflecting solid community support. | 41.0K, slightly lower but still significant. |
| Last Updated | 2026-01-26, showing ongoing maintenance. | ✓2026-02-08, indicating more recent updates. |
| Unpacked Size | 7.0 MB, which is relatively large for a CSS framework. | ✓1.8 MB, lightweight for a styled-component solution. |
| Weekly Downloads | 231.7K, indicating decent, but limited adoption. | ✓8.1M, suggesting a broader use case and higher popularity. |
| Bundle Size (gzip) | ✓173 B, minimal additional overhead. | 19.8 kB, still reasonable but higher than Bulma. |
| Use Case Suitability | Best for traditional web projects needing CSS framework use. | ✓Optimal for React applications requiring dynamic styling. |
| Development Community | Strong community support with many resources. | Active community specializes in React and component libraries. |