Benchmark: lodash vs deepmerge vs deepmerge-ts

HTML Preparation code:

<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.6.2/lodash.min.js'></script>
<script src='https://unpkg.com/deepmerge@4.2.2/dist/umd.js'></script>
<script type="module">
import { deepmerge } from 'https://unpkg.com/deepmerge-ts@4.2.1/dist/node/index.mjs';
window.deepmergeTs = deepmerge;
</script>

Tests:

lodash
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', c: { a: 'a', b: { c: 'c' } } }; var b = { c: { b: { d: 'a' }, c: { d: 'd' } } }; var c = _.merge({}, a, b); const x = { foo: { bar: 3 }, array: [{ does: 'work', too: [ 1, 2, 3 ] }] } const y = { foo: { baz: 4 }, quux: 5, array: [{ does: 'work', too: [ 4, 5, 6 ] }, { really: 'yes' }] } var z = _.merge({}, x, y);
deepmerge
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', c: { a: 'a', b: { c: 'c' } } }; var b = { c: { b: { d: 'a' }, c: { d: 'd' } } }; var c = deepmerge({}, a, b); const x = { foo: { bar: 3 }, array: [{ does: 'work', too: [ 1, 2, 3 ] }] } const y = { foo: { baz: 4 }, quux: 5, array: [{ does: 'work', too: [ 4, 5, 6 ] }, { really: 'yes' }] } var z = deepmerge({}, x, y);
deepmerge-ts
var a = { a: 'oh', b: 'my', c: { a: 'a', b: { c: 'c' } } }; var b = { c: { b: { d: 'a' }, c: { d: 'd' } } }; var c = deepmerge({}, a, b); const x = { foo: { bar: 3 }, array: [{ does: 'work', too: [ 1, 2, 3 ] }] } const y = { foo: { baz: 4 }, quux: 5, array: [{ does: 'work', too: [ 4, 5, 6 ] }, { really: 'yes' }] } var z = deepmergeTs({}, x, y);

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 47 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 41 runs

deepmerge

552K/s

deepmerge-ts

486K/s

lodash

188K/s

Fastest: deepmerge (2.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ deepmerge: 551,960 ops/sec
• deepmerge-ts: 485,566 ops/sec
• lodash: 187,685 ops/sec

Firefox 6 runs

deepmerge

393K/s

deepmerge-ts

237K/s

lodash

137K/s

Fastest: deepmerge (2.9x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ deepmerge: 392,765 ops/sec
• deepmerge-ts: 236,927 ops/sec
• lodash: 137,435 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
deepmerge
deepmerge-ts

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 7 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:147.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/147.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 147 on Linux

View result in a separate tab

deepmerge

464K/s

deepmerge-ts

365K/s

lodash

134K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ deepmerge	463,729 Ops/sec
deepmerge-ts	365,425 Ops/sec
lodash	134,323 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's break down the benchmark and its components.

**Benchmark Overview**

The provided benchmark compares the performance of three JavaScript libraries: Lodash, DeepMerge, and DeepMerge-ts. The test cases focus on merging objects with nested structures, demonstrating the efficiency and readability of each library.

**Test Cases**

Each test case uses a similar structure:

1. Initial objects `a` and `b` are defined.
2. An object `c` (or `z`) is created by merging `a` and `b` using one of the three libraries: Lodash, DeepMerge, or DeepMerge-ts.

**Library Explanation**

1. **Lodash**: A popular utility library that provides a wide range of functions for functional programming, data manipulation, and more. The merge function (`_.merge()`) is used to combine two objects into a new object.
2. **DeepMerge**: A lightweight merging library designed specifically for deep object merges. It's optimized for performance and easy to use. In this benchmark, DeepMerge is compared with its TypeScript variant.
3. **DeepMerge-ts**: The TypeScript-compiled version of DeepMerge, allowing it to work seamlessly with JavaScript type checking.

**Comparison Options**

The three libraries have different approaches:

1. **Lodash**: Uses a recursive function to traverse the object tree and merge values. This approach can be efficient but might lead to slower performance for very deep objects.
2. **DeepMerge**: Employs an iterative, algorithmic approach that avoids recursion and uses caching to optimize performance.
3. **DeepMerge-ts**: Built on top of DeepMerge, it inherits the same iterative approach but with additional type safety features enabled through TypeScript compilation.

**Pros and Cons**

* **Lodash**:
	+ Pros: Familiarity with Lodash, extensive library, easy to use.
	+ Cons: Can lead to slower performance for deep objects, larger binary size.
* **DeepMerge**:
	+ Pros: Lightweight, optimized performance, easy to integrate.
	+ Cons: Less familiar to developers without prior experience, might require more code changes for complex scenarios.
* **DeepMerge-ts**:
	+ Pros: Combines the benefits of DeepMerge with TypeScript type safety and checks.
	+ Cons: Additional overhead due to compilation, potential trade-off in performance.

**Considerations**

When choosing a library for deep object merging:

1. Performance: If speed is crucial, consider using DeepMerge or its variants (e.g., `deepmerge-ts`).
2. Code Readability: For maintainable code with ease of use, Lodash might be the better choice.
3. Integration and Type Safety: When working with TypeScript projects or requiring strong type checking, `DeepMerge-ts` is a good option.

**Other Alternatives**

Additional libraries that can be used for deep object merging include:

* **Immer**: A state management library that supports immutable data structures and provides a simple way to merge objects.
* **Fusion**: A lightweight, fast, and efficient deep merge library optimized for performance.

Keep in mind that each library has its strengths and weaknesses, and the best choice ultimately depends on your project's specific requirements.

lodash vs deepmerge vs deepmerge-ts (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: `lodash vs deepmerge vs deepmerge-ts`

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash

deepmerge

deepmerge-ts

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 47 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 41 runs

Firefox 6 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 vs deepmerge vs deepmerge-ts (version: 0) Benchmark.js

Comparing performance of: lodash vs deepmerge vs deepmerge-ts

Created: 4 years ago by: Guest

Go to the latest result

lodash

deepmerge

deepmerge-ts

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 47 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 41 runs

Firefox 6 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 vs deepmerge vs deepmerge-ts`