flexsearch vs fuse.js
Side-by-side comparison of flexsearch and fuse.js
- Weekly Downloads
- 863.7K
- Stars
- 13.6K
- Gzip Size
- 17.5 kB
- License
- Apache-2.0
- Last Updated
- 4mo ago
- Open Issues
- 27
- Forks
- 520
- Unpacked Size
- 2.3 MB
- Dependencies
- 1
- Weekly Downloads
- 7.0M
- Stars
- 20.0K
- Gzip Size
- 6.7 kB
- License
- Apache-2.0
- Last Updated
- 11mo ago
- Open Issues
- 12
- Forks
- 802
- Unpacked Size
- 456.0 kB
- Dependencies
- 1
Download Trends
Verdict
flexsearch excels in scenarios demanding advanced full-text search capabilities, catering to projects requiring comprehensive search features akin to larger search engines. In contrast, fuse.js is designed for lightweight fuzzy searching, making it suitable for simpler applications where quick and efficient searching is a priority.
When selecting between flexsearch and fuse.js, consider the complexity of your search requirements. If your project needs sophisticated full-text retrieval along with built-in features for handling fuzzy search, flexsearch is a stronger fit. On the other hand, for smaller projects or when a minimalist approach is acceptable, fuse.js is the better choice due to its lighter bundle size and ease of integration.
Developers may want to be mindful of the trade-offs in performance versus features, especially in larger applications. While flexsearch has a higher unpacked size, it delivers extensive functionality; fuse.js is significantly smaller but may lack some advanced features required for intricate search scenarios.
Detailed Comparison
| Criteria | flexsearch | fuse.js |
|---|---|---|
| Licenses | Both are under the Apache-2.0 License, ensuring similar freedoms. | Both are under the Apache-2.0 License, ensuring similar freedoms. |
| Description | Designed for full-text search with extensive capabilities. | Focused on lightweight fuzzy-search functionality. |
| Open Issues | 27 open issues indicate some ongoing concerns. | ✓11 open issues suggest a better-maintained codebase. |
| GitHub Forks | 520 forks indicate a decent level of community engagement. | ✓801 forks show higher community involvement and experimentation. |
| GitHub Stars | 13.6K stars reflect a good level of interest. | ✓20.0K stars show higher popularity among developers. |
| Last Updated | ✓Last updated in September 2025, showing ongoing development. | Last updated in March 2025, slightly earlier but still recent. |
| Unpacked Size | Unpacked size of 2.3 MB; relatively larger due to comprehensive features. | ✓More compact at 456.0 kB, ideal for lightweight applications. |
| Search Features | ✓Offers complex search capabilities including fuzzy matching. | Primarily supports simple fuzzy-searching mechanisms. |
| Weekly Downloads | 834.6K weekly downloads indicate solid traction. | ✓7.0M weekly downloads suggest wider adoption and usage. |
| Bundle Size (gzip) | Larger at 17.5 kB, impacting initial load time. | ✓Minimal at 6.7 kB, beneficial for performance. |
| Integration Complexity | May require more setup due to advanced features. | ✓Easy to integrate with simple configurations. |