Run results for: Rambda vs. Lodash 20251113 (Rambda, not Ramda!)

Compares performance on the same task using Lodash vs two styles of Ramda vs two styles of "native" Javascript. In all cases the task is pulling "counter" property from each item in an array, filtering out odd items, squaring them, then returning those squared values that have less than two digits.

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/142.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser: Chrome 142

Operating system: Windows

Device Platform: Desktop

Date tested: 8 months ago

Rambda without relying on currying or composition

212.1M/s

Lodash

1.5M/s

Rambda with pipe

5K/s

View exact numbers

Test name	Executions per second
✓ Rambda without relying on currying or composition	212,135,520 Ops/sec
Lodash	1,466,938 Ops/sec
Rambda with pipe	5,314 Ops/sec

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/rambda/10.3.2/rambda.umd.min.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/npm/lodash@4.17.21/lodash.min.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

var data = _.range(10000).map(function(i) {
  return {
    counter: i
  }
});

function isOdd(num) {
  return num % 2 === 1;
}

function square(num) {
  return num * num;
}

function lessThanThreeDigits(num) {
  return num.toString().length < 3;
}

Tests:

Lodash
var result = _.chain(data) .pick('counter') .filter(isOdd) .map(square) .filter(lessThanThreeDigits) .value();
Rambda without relying on currying or composition
var result = R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits, R.map(square, R.filter(isOdd, R.pluck('counter', data))));
Rambda with pipe
var result = R.pipe(data, R.pluck('counter'), R.filter(isOdd), R.map(square), R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits) );