Benchmark: dayjs vs luxon vs js-joda vs date-fns (parsing)

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/dayjs@1.11.9/dayjs.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/dayjs@1/plugin/customParseFormat.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/luxon@3.4.3/build/global/luxon.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/@js-joda/core@5.5.3/dist/js-joda.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/date-fns/1.9.0/date_fns.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

dayjs.extend(window.dayjs_plugin_customParseFormat);

Tests:

Dayjs
dayjs('23/9/1 0:0:0', 'YY/M/D H:m:s');
luxon
luxon.DateTime.fromFormat('23/9/1 0:0:0', 'yy/M/d H:m:s');
js-joda
JSJoda.LocalDateTime.parse('23/9/1 0:0:0', JSJoda.DateTimeFormatter.ofPattern('yy/M/d H:m:s'));
date-fns
dateFns.parse('23/9/1 0:0:0', 'yy/M/d H:m:s', new Date())

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 80 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 66 runs

date-fns

2.8M/s

Dayjs

598K/s

js-joda

370K/s

luxon

68K/s

Fastest: date-fns (41.1x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ date-fns: 2,778,994 ops/sec
• Dayjs: 597,839 ops/sec
• js-joda: 369,676 ops/sec
• luxon: 67,642 ops/sec

Firefox 14 runs

date-fns

2.4M/s

Dayjs

506K/s

luxon

55K/s

js-joda

55K/s

Fastest: date-fns (43.5x faster)

View exact numbers

✓ date-fns: 2,381,783 ops/sec
• Dayjs: 506,475 ops/sec
• luxon: 55,236 ops/sec
• js-joda: 54,763 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
Dayjs
luxon
js-joda
date-fns

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 4 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:148.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/148.0

Browser/OS: Firefox 148 on Mac OS X 10.15

View result in a separate tab

date-fns

5.4M/s

Dayjs

1.1M/s

js-joda

122K/s

luxon

121K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ date-fns	5,408,088 Ops/sec
Dayjs	1,120,856 Ops/sec
js-joda	122,432 Ops/sec
luxon	120,915 Ops/sec

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

LLMs can make mistakes. Check important info.

Let's dive into the world of JavaScript date parsing benchmarks.

**Overview**

The provided benchmark compares the performance of four JavaScript libraries for parsing date strings: Dayjs, Luxon, JSJoda, and Date-fns. Each library is tested with the same input string format: "23/9/1 0:0:0", which represents a specific date and time.

**Libraries**

Here's a brief introduction to each library:

1. **Dayjs**: Dayjs is a modern JavaScript date library that provides a simple and intuitive API for working with dates.
2. **Luxon**: Luxon is another popular JavaScript date library that offers a robust set of features for handling dates, including parsing, formatting, and calculations.
3. **JSJoda**: JSJoda is a JavaScript implementation of the Joda-Time library, which is a widely used Java library for working with dates and times.
4. **Date-fns**: Date-fns is a lightweight JavaScript library that provides a simple API for date and time manipulation.

**Options Compared**

In this benchmark, each library is tested with a different parsing strategy:

* Dayjs uses its built-in `parse()` function to parse the input string.
* Luxon uses its `DateTime.fromFormat()` method to parse the input string.
* JSJoda uses its `LocalDateTime.parse()` method to parse the input string.
* Date-fns uses its `parse()` function to parse the input string, with an additional option to specify a custom parser.

**Pros and Cons**

Here's a brief summary of the pros and cons of each library's approach:

1. **Dayjs**:
	* Pros: Simple and easy to use, fast parsing performance.
	* Cons: May not handle all edge cases correctly, limited configuration options.
2. **Luxon**:
	* Pros: Robust set of features, flexible parsing options, good documentation.
	* Cons: May be overkill for simple date parsing tasks, some users may find it overwhelming.
3. **JSJoda**:
	* Pros: Similar to Joda-Time library, widely used and well-maintained, offers a lot of configuration options.
	* Cons: Steeper learning curve due to its complexity, may not be suitable for all developers.
4. **Date-fns**:
	* Pros: Lightweight and easy to use, simple API, fast parsing performance.
	* Cons: Limited features compared to other libraries, some users may find it too basic.

**Other Considerations**

When choosing a date parsing library, consider the following factors:

* **Performance**: If you need high-performance parsing, Luxon or Date-fns might be a better choice. For simpler tasks, Dayjs or JSJoda might suffice.
* **Feature set**: If you need advanced features like timezone support or calculations, Luxon or JSJoda might be a better fit.
* **Ease of use**: If you prefer a simple and intuitive API, Dayjs or Date-fns might be the way to go.

**Alternatives**

If you're not satisfied with these libraries, here are some alternative date parsing options:

1. **Moment.js**: A popular JavaScript library for working with dates and times.
2. **Date-Picker**: A lightweight JavaScript library for handling date manipulation.
3. **ms/Date-Parse**: A simple and fast library for parsing dates.

I hope this explanation helps you understand the benchmark results and choose the best date parsing library for your needs!

dayjs vs luxon vs js-joda vs date-fns (parsing) (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: `Dayjs vs luxon vs js-joda vs date-fns`

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

Dayjs

luxon

js-joda

date-fns

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 80 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 66 runs

Firefox 14 runs

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

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

dayjs vs luxon vs js-joda vs date-fns (parsing) (version: 1)

Comparing performance of: Dayjs vs luxon vs js-joda vs date-fns

Created: 2 years ago by: Registered User

Go to the latest result

Dayjs

luxon

js-joda

date-fns

Historical Performance Data aggregated from 80 community runs

Desktop Results:

Chrome 66 runs

Firefox 14 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: `Dayjs vs luxon vs js-joda vs date-fns`