Benchmark: Moment Dayjs Date-fns format benchmark 2

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://unpkg.com/dayjs@1.11.7/dayjs.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://igor.moomers.org/random/datefns.js"></script>
<script src='https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/moment.js/2.29.4/moment.min.js'></script>

Script Preparation code:

window.ds = "2020-02-19T00:51:53.623839+00:00";

Tests:

Date-fns
window.datefns.format(window.datefns.parseISO(window.ds), "yyyy-mm-dd")
Momentjs
moment(ds).format("YYYY-MM-DD")
Dayjs
dayjs(ds).format("YYYY-MM-DD")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
Date-fns
Momentjs
Dayjs

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/145.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 145 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
Date-fns	723451.8 Ops/sec
Momentjs	356107.5 Ops/sec
Dayjs	504824.8 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

**Overview of the Benchmark**

The provided JSON represents a JavaScript microbenchmarking test case on MeasureThat.net. The benchmark measures the performance of three date formatting libraries: Moment.js, Day.js, and Date-fns.

**What is tested?**

Each test case uses a specific library to format a date string from ISO format to a desired output format (YYYY-MM-DD). The following libraries are used:

* **Moment.js**: A popular JavaScript date manipulation library.
* **Day.js**: A lightweight and modern alternative to Moment.js for date and time operations.
* **Date-fns**: A small, fast, and feature-rich date formatting library.

**Options compared**

The benchmark compares the performance of these three libraries in the following scenarios:

* Formatting a single date string using each library's `format()` method with the same input parameters.
* This comparison allows users to evaluate which library is fastest for simple date formatting tasks.

**Pros and Cons of different approaches**

Here are some pros and cons of each library's approach:

* **Moment.js**: Pros: Wide range of features, well-maintained, and widely adopted. Cons: Large size (≈ 120KB gzipped), slower performance compared to other libraries.
* **Day.js**: Pros: Lightweight (≈ 15KB gzipped), fast performance, and modern API. Cons: Smaller community compared to Moment.js, limited feature set.
* **Date-fns**: Pros: Small size (≈ 20KB gzipped), fast performance, and extensive feature set. Cons: Less well-known than other libraries.

**Special JS features or syntax**

None of the libraries use special JavaScript features or syntax that are not commonly used in date formatting tasks.

**Other considerations**

When choosing a library for date formatting, consider the following factors:

* **Performance**: If speed is critical, Day.js and Date-fns might be better choices.
* **Feature set**: If you need advanced features like handling time zones, offset calculations, or specific cultural formats, Moment.js might be a better fit.
* **Size and maintenance**: If you prioritize size and maintenance overhead, Day.js or Date-fns could be suitable options.

**Alternatives**

Other popular JavaScript date formatting libraries include:

* **Luxon**: A modern, feature-rich library with good performance and a small footprint (≈ 30KB gzipped).
* **Moment.js alternatives**: Libraries like `dayjs` and `daypicker` are also available for those already familiar with Moment.js.
* **Native JavaScript APIs**: For simple date formatting tasks, native JavaScript APIs like `Date.prototype.toISOString()` or `Intl.DateTimeFormat` might be sufficient.

Related benchmarks:

Moment Dayjs Date-fns format benchmark 2 (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: Date-fns vs Momentjs vs Dayjs

Created: 3 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

Date-fns

Momentjs

Dayjs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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