lodash vs radash

utility

lodash

radash

Lodash is the veteran utility library that has dominated JavaScript development since 2012, offering hundreds of battle-tested functions for array manipulation, object operations, and common programming tasks. Radash is a modern alternative released in 2022, designed as a lightweight, TypeScript-first utility library with a functional programming approach and zero dependencies.

This comparison matters because both libraries solve similar problems but with fundamentally different philosophies. Lodash targets developers who need comprehensive utilities with maximum performance and backward compatibility, while radash appeals to teams seeking a minimal footprint, native TypeScript support, and modern JavaScript practices without legacy baggage.

Head-to-Head

Bundle Size & Tree-Shaking→ radash wins

lodash

Full library is ~71KB minified (24KB gzipped). Supports tree-shaking with ES modules, but historically included in full by many projects. Per-function imports available via lodash-es or individual packages.

radash

Significantly smaller at ~14KB minified for the full library. Built for tree-shaking from the ground up with modern ES modules. Zero dependencies keeps the dependency graph clean.

Functional Programming Design→ radash wins

lodash

Imperative, data-first API by default. Provides lodash/fp module for curried, data-last functions, but feels bolted-on. Manual currying required for standard methods.

radash

Designed with functional patterns in mind: immutability by default, pure functions, and composable utilities. Data-last parameter ordering makes composition natural without a separate FP module.

TypeScript Support→ radash wins

lodash

TypeScript definitions via @types/lodash maintained by DefinitelyTyped community. Types are comprehensive but sometimes lag behind updates and can have inconsistencies.

radash

Written in TypeScript from the ground up with first-class type inference. Generic types are more precise, and autocompletion works better out of the box. No separate @types package needed.

Function Coverage & Maturity→ lodash wins

lodash

Over 300 utility functions covering nearly every conceivable use case. Decade of production battle-testing. Includes specialized utilities like debounce, throttle, and deep cloning with edge case handling.

radash

Around 60 core utilities focused on the most common operations. Newer library with less production history. Missing some specialized functions like debounce, throttle, or complex string manipulation.

Performance & Optimization→ lodash wins

lodash

Heavily optimized over years with performance as a primary goal. Uses internal caching, optimized algorithms, and handles edge cases efficiently. Prioritizes speed over functional purity.

radash

Good performance with modern JavaScript approaches, but less micro-optimization. Smaller codebase means less overhead, but individual functions may not match lodash's specialized optimizations.

Community & Ecosystem→ lodash wins

lodash

Massive ecosystem with 58M+ weekly npm downloads. Extensive Stack Overflow coverage, documentation, and third-party resources. Industry standard with widespread team familiarity.

radash

Growing but much smaller community with ~140K weekly downloads. Less Stack Overflow content and fewer tutorials. Documentation is clean but less comprehensive.

Verdict

Choose radash if you're starting a new TypeScript project, value small bundle sizes, and prefer functional programming patterns. It's the modern choice for teams comfortable with contemporary JavaScript who don't need every possible utility function. The superior TypeScript integration alone makes it compelling for type-safe codebases, and the smaller footprint directly improves load times for end users.

Choose lodash if you need comprehensive utility coverage, require specific functions like debounce/throttle, or work on established codebases where it's already integrated. The performance optimizations and battle-tested stability matter for high-traffic applications, and the massive community means you'll find solutions to edge cases faster. For enterprise teams where developer familiarity reduces onboarding time, lodash's ubiquity is a genuine advantage.

When to Use Each

If you are building a modern React/Vue app with TypeScript and care about bundle size → use radash because it provides excellent type inference, tree-shakes effectively, and covers the 80% of utilities you actually need without the bloat.

If you are maintaining a large enterprise application with complex data transformations and performance requirements → use lodash because its optimized algorithms, comprehensive function set, and decade of edge case handling will save you from reinventing solutions.

If you are writing functional JavaScript with heavy composition and want clean, immutable operations → use radash because its API is designed for chaining and composition without needing a separate FP module or wrapper functions.

If you need specialized utilities like debounce, throttle, deep merge with custom behavior, or complex string manipulation → use lodash because radash simply doesn't include these functions and you'd need additional dependencies anyway.

Learn More

lodash →radash →

Head-to-Head

Bundle Size & Tree-Shaking→ radash wins

lodash

radash

Significantly smaller at ~14KB minified for the full library. Built for tree-shaking from the ground up with modern ES modules. Zero dependencies keeps the dependency graph clean.

Functional Programming Design→ radash wins

lodash

Imperative, data-first API by default. Provides lodash/fp module for curried, data-last functions, but feels bolted-on. Manual currying required for standard methods.

radash

Designed with functional patterns in mind: immutability by default, pure functions, and composable utilities. Data-last parameter ordering makes composition natural without a separate FP module.

TypeScript Support→ radash wins

lodash

TypeScript definitions via @types/lodash maintained by DefinitelyTyped community. Types are comprehensive but sometimes lag behind updates and can have inconsistencies.

radash

Written in TypeScript from the ground up with first-class type inference. Generic types are more precise, and autocompletion works better out of the box. No separate @types package needed.

Function Coverage & Maturity→ lodash wins

lodash

radash

Around 60 core utilities focused on the most common operations. Newer library with less production history. Missing some specialized functions like debounce, throttle, or complex string manipulation.

Performance & Optimization→ lodash wins

lodash

Heavily optimized over years with performance as a primary goal. Uses internal caching, optimized algorithms, and handles edge cases efficiently. Prioritizes speed over functional purity.

radash

Good performance with modern JavaScript approaches, but less micro-optimization. Smaller codebase means less overhead, but individual functions may not match lodash's specialized optimizations.

Community & Ecosystem→ lodash wins

lodash

Massive ecosystem with 58M+ weekly npm downloads. Extensive Stack Overflow coverage, documentation, and third-party resources. Industry standard with widespread team familiarity.

radash

Growing but much smaller community with ~140K weekly downloads. Less Stack Overflow content and fewer tutorials. Documentation is clean but less comprehensive.

Verdict

When to Use Each