Benchmark: Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone vs JSON Parse

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.5/lodash.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

var MyObject = {
  description: 'Creates a deep copy of source, which should be an object or an array.',
  myNumber: 123456789,
  myBoolean: true,
  jayson: {
    stringify: 'JSON.stringify() method converts a JavaScript value to a JSON string....',
    parse: 'JSON.parse() method parses a JSON string...'
  }
};

var myCopy = null;

Tests:

Lodash cloneDeep
myCopy = _.cloneDeep(MyObject);
Native structuredClone
myCopy = structuredClone(MyObject);
JSON Parse
myCopy = JSON.parse(JSON.stringify(MyObject));

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 108 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 83 runs

Lodash cloneDeep

1.3M/s

JSON Parse

1.0M/s

Native structuredClone

452K/s

Fastest: Lodash cloneDeep (2.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Lodash cloneDeep: 1,303,619 ops/sec
• JSON Parse: 1,009,190 ops/sec
• Native structuredClone: 451,766 ops/sec

Firefox 14 runs

Lodash cloneDeep

1.0M/s

JSON Parse

772K/s

Native structuredClone

554K/s

Fastest: Lodash cloneDeep (1.8x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Lodash cloneDeep: 1,007,797 ops/sec
• JSON Parse: 772,053 ops/sec
• Native structuredClone: 554,256 ops/sec

Mobile Results:

Chrome 11 runs

Lodash cloneDeep

684K/s

JSON Parse

615K/s

Native structuredClone

110K/s

Fastest: Lodash cloneDeep (6.2x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ Lodash cloneDeep: 683,730 ops/sec
• JSON Parse: 614,853 ops/sec
• Native structuredClone: 110,327 ops/sec

Results show median performance across all community submissions. Run this benchmark yourself to verify on your device.

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Lodash cloneDeep
Native structuredClone
JSON Parse

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: one year ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/139.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 139 on Windows

View result in a separate tab

JSON Parse

1.8M/s

Lodash cloneDeep

1.7M/s

Native structuredClone

663K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ JSON Parse	1,773,321 Ops/sec
Lodash cloneDeep	1,714,215 Ops/sec
Native structuredClone	662,994 Ops/sec

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmark test case for comparing the performance of three different approaches: Lodash's `cloneDeep`, Web API's `structuredClone`, and `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())`.

**Approaches Compared**

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**: This is a widely used library function that creates a deep copy of an object, handling cycles and nested objects.
2. **Web API's structuredClone**: Introduced in ECMAScript 2020, this function provides a new way to create deep copies of objects without the need for libraries like Lodash.
3. **JSON Parse (JSON Stringify)**: This approach creates a shallow copy of an object by serializing it as a JSON string and then parsing it back into an object.

**Pros and Cons of Each Approach**

1. **Lodash cloneDeep**:
	* Pros:
		+ Widely supported and maintained.
		+ Handles cycles and nested objects efficiently.
	* Cons:
		+ Requires the Lodash library, which adds overhead.
		+ May not be optimized for performance in all scenarios.
2. **Web API's structuredClone**:
	* Pros:
		+ Part of the standard JavaScript API, no additional libraries required.
		+ Optimized for performance and handling cycles efficiently.
	* Cons:
		+ Still relatively new (ECMAScript 2020), may not be fully supported by older browsers or versions.
3. **JSON Parse (JSON Stringify)**:
	* Pros:
		+ Lightweight and fast, as it only requires basic JavaScript functionality.
	* Cons:
		+ Creates a shallow copy, which might not be suitable for all use cases.
		+ Requires serializing the object to a string first, which can lead to additional overhead.

**Library and Purpose**

The Lodash library is a popular JavaScript utility library that provides various helper functions for tasks like array manipulation, functional programming, and more. In this case, `cloneDeep` is used to create deep copies of objects.

**Special JS Feature or Syntax**

There are no specific JS features or syntaxes being tested in this benchmark, apart from the use of ECMAScript 2020's `structuredClone` function.

**Alternatives**

If you need alternatives to these approaches:

1. **Other deep copy libraries**: If you prefer a more robust and feature-rich library than Lodash for deep copying, consider using other libraries like `lodash-es` or ` deep-copy`.
2. **Native methods**: For shallow copies, using `Object.assign()` or `JSON.parse(JSON.stringify())` might be sufficient.
3. **Custom implementation**: If performance is critical, you can also implement your own deep copying algorithm from scratch.

In summary, the choice of approach depends on your specific requirements, performance considerations, and personal preference for library usage.

Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone vs JSON Parse (version: 0)

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/structuredClone

Comparing performance of: `Lodash cloneDeep vs Native structuredClone vs JSON Parse`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Native structuredClone

JSON Parse

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 108 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 83 runs

Firefox 14 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 11 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Lodash cloneDeep vs structuredClone vs JSON Parse (version: 0)

https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/structuredClone

Comparing performance of: Lodash cloneDeep vs Native structuredClone vs JSON Parse

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

Lodash cloneDeep

Native structuredClone

JSON Parse

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 108 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 83 runs

Firefox 14 runs

Mobile Results:

Chrome 11 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Autogenerated LLM Summary (model llama3.2:3b, generated one year ago):

Related benchmarks

Comparing performance of: `Lodash cloneDeep vs Native structuredClone vs JSON Parse`