rollup vs webpack
Side-by-side comparison of rollup and webpack
- Weekly Downloads
- 69.7M
- Stars
- 26.2K
- Gzip Size
- 167.9 kB
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 2d ago
- Open Issues
- 598
- Forks
- 1.7K
- Unpacked Size
- 2.8 MB
- Dependencies
- 2
- Weekly Downloads
- 38.4M
- Stars
- 65.9K
- Gzip Size
- —
- License
- MIT
- Last Updated
- 1h ago
- Open Issues
- 211
- Forks
- 9.2K
- Unpacked Size
- 5.8 MB
- Dependencies
- —
Download Trends
Verdict
Rollup is tailored primarily for building libraries and applications focused on ES modules, offering a more minimal and efficient bundling process. It excels at producing smaller bundle sizes and is particularly advantageous for projects that prioritize performance and simplicity in their module architecture.
In contrast, webpack is designed for more complex applications that require advanced features such as code splitting and extensive loader support for different file types. If your project demands handling various formats or involves a larger team familiar with the complexities of build tools, webpack is likely the better choice.
Migration from one to the other can involve significant changes in configuration and understanding of their respective ecosystems. Developers should assess the required features carefully to determine the best fit for their use case while considering future maintainability.
Detailed Comparison
| Criteria | rollup | webpack |
|---|---|---|
| Bundle Size | ✓Minimal at 167.9 kB gzip, designed for performance | Larger bundle size requiring careful management |
| Open Issues | 598 issues, suggesting ongoing maintenance needs | ✓206 issues, indicating better management or fewer outstanding concerns |
| GitHub Forks | 1.7K forks showing active development interest | ✓9.2K forks indicating extensive customization and utility |
| GitHub Stars | 26.2K, showing good community interest | ✓65.9K, reflecting greater popularity and community support |
| Last Updated | Updated recently on 2026-02-06 | Most recent on 2026-02-07, showing active development |
| Unpacked Size | ✓2.8 MB, demonstrating a lighter footprint | 5.8 MB, potentially impacting load times for larger applications |
| Learning Curve | ✓Simpler configuration appeals to developers seeking a quick setup | More complex due to loaders and extensive configuration options |
| Weekly Downloads | ✓69.6M, indicating strong adoption in the ES module community | 38.0M, still significant but less than rollup |
| Overall Positioning | Optimized for ES modules, focused on simplicity and smaller bundles | ✓Versatile with support for multiple module systems and complex configurations |
| Use Case Adaptability | Ideal for library authors and small projects | ✓Well-suited for large, intricate applications requiring lots of customization |