@headlessui/react vs @mantine/core
Side-by-side comparison of @headlessui/react and @mantine/core
- Weekly Downloads
- 4.1M
- Stars
- 28.4K
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 1mo ago
- Open Issues
- 78
- Forks
- 1.2K
- Unpacked Size
- 1.0 MB
- Weekly Downloads
- 1.3M
- Stars
- 30.5K
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 2d ago
- Open Issues
- 45
- Forks
- 2.2K
- Unpacked Size
- 12.0 MB
Download Trends
Verdict
@headlessui/react serves developers looking for unstyled, customizable, and accessible UI components that fit seamlessly with Tailwind CSS, making it ideal for projects focused on design flexibility. In contrast, @mantine/core offers a robust library with a strong emphasis on usability and a variety of pre-styled components, appealing to developers seeking an intuitive UI experience with minimal setup.
For projects that prioritize accessibility and integration with Tailwind CSS, @headlessui/react is likely the better choice, especially for small to medium-sized applications where design customization is crucial. Conversely, if you are building larger applications or need comprehensive components that require less configuration and a focus on developer experience, @mantine/core may be more suitable.
While both libraries are designed with accessibility in mind, @headlessui/react allows for greater design freedom at the cost of additional styling work, while @mantine/core offers a more opinionated and visually comprehensive approach. Consider the styling strategy and team preferences carefully when making a choice.
Detailed Comparison
| Criteria | @headlessui/react | @mantine/core |
|---|---|---|
| Open Issues | 78 open issues, reflecting ongoing engagement and need for improvements. | ✓45 open issues, which may suggest better stability or maintenance. |
| GitHub Forks | 1.2K forks, suggesting moderate levels of custom development. | ✓2.2K forks, indicating a higher tendency for adaptation and extensions. |
| GitHub Stars | 28.4K stars, showing considerable popularity and developer appreciation. | ✓30.5K stars, representing a slight edge in community favor. |
| Last Updated | Last updated on 2025-12-19, indicating a recent refresh. | ✓More recent update on 2026-02-06, suggesting active development. |
| Accessibility | ✓Highly focused on accessibility with unstyled components. | Presents good accessibility features but with more pre-defined elements. |
| Unpacked Size | ✓1.0 MB, which is lightweight and promotes faster loading. | 12.0 MB, indicating a more feature-rich library at the expense of size. |
| Learning Curve | May require more time to style components appropriately. | ✓Easier for new developers to pick up due to pre-styled components. |
| Weekly Downloads | ✓4.1M, indicating strong community interest and adoption. | 1.3M, which still reflects a healthy user base. |
| Component Variety | Provides essential components without additional complexity. | ✓Offers a broader range of components for various use cases. |
| Overall Positioning | Focuses on unstyled, accessible components for Tailwind integration. | Emphasizes usability and pre-styled components for quick implementation. |
| Theming Flexibility | Lacks built-in styles, allowing for total design freedom. | Offers pre-designed components that can be customized. |