lucia vs next-auth
Side-by-side comparison of lucia and next-auth
- Weekly Downloads
- 100.6K
- Stars
- 10.4K
- Gzip Size
- 4.2 kB
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 6mo ago
- Open Issues
- 22
- Forks
- 527
- Unpacked Size
- 46.0 kB
- Dependencies
- 4
- Weekly Downloads
- 2.5M
- Stars
- 28.1K
- Gzip Size
- 82.2 kB
- License
- ISC
- Last Updated
- 23h ago
- Open Issues
- 569
- Forks
- 4.0K
- Unpacked Size
- 823.8 kB
- Dependencies
- 9
Download Trends
Verdict
lucia is designed to be a simple and flexible authentication solution suitable for a variety of projects, particularly for those looking for minimal overhead. In contrast, next-auth is tailored specifically for Next.js applications, offering extensive features and integration that cater to the needs of developers within that ecosystem.
If your project is lightweight and you prefer a straightforward approach, lucia may be the better choice due to its smaller bundle size and ease of use. Conversely, if you are developing a complex Next.js application and require comprehensive authentication features and support for multiple providers, next-auth is likely the more appropriate option.
While lucia remains lighter in terms of size and the number of open issues, next-auth has a larger community and ecosystem support, which might be beneficial as your application grows and requires more robust solutions in authentication.
Detailed Comparison
| Criteria | lucia | next-auth |
|---|---|---|
| Topics | Covers essential topics like auth and oauth. | ✓Includes a wider array of authentication topics, especially for modern frameworks. |
| License | MIT License provides flexibility for commercial use. | ISC License is permissive and simple. |
| Version | Current version 3.2.2. | ✓Latest version 4.24.13. |
| Categories | Focuses solely on authentication. | ✓Categorized under authentication with deeper Next.js ties. |
| Description | Offers flexible authentication options. | Focused on Next.js integration. |
| Open Issues | ✓22 open issues point to manageable maintenance. | 570 open issues reflect a larger scope of functionality and potential growing pains. |
| GitHub Forks | 527 forks suggest useful adaptations. | ✓4.0K forks indicate extensive customizations. |
| GitHub Stars | 10.4K stars mark a strong interest from developers. | ✓28.1K stars reflect a larger community support. |
| Unpacked Size | ✓Compact at 46.0 kB, making it lightweight. | Larger at 823.8 kB, indicating more features. |
| Weekly Downloads | 98.4K downloads indicate moderate usage. | ✓2.5M downloads show wide adoption. |
| Bundle Size (gzip) | ✓Efficient at 4.2 kB, optimizing load times. | Bigger at 64.0 kB, which requires more resources. |