tsup vs rollup

build-tool

tsup

rollup

tsup and Rollup represent two distinct philosophies in JavaScript build tooling. tsup is a zero-configuration bundler built on esbuild, designed specifically for library authors who want fast builds and native TypeScript support without complex setup. Rollup is a mature, plugin-based bundler that prioritizes flexibility and advanced code-splitting capabilities, making it ideal for projects requiring granular control over output.

The comparison matters because choosing the wrong tool impacts development velocity and bundle quality. Library authors typically need fast iteration and simple configuration, while complex applications may require sophisticated code-splitting strategies. tsup targets developers who value convention over configuration, while Rollup appeals to teams needing maximum customization for intricate bundling scenarios.

Head-to-Head

Build Speed→ tsup wins

tsup

Completes builds in approximately 7 seconds for typical TypeScript libraries by leveraging esbuild's Go-based performance. Parallel processing and minimal configuration overhead make rebuilds exceptionally fast during development.

rollup

Deliberately slower than esbuild-based tools, often taking 2-3x longer for equivalent builds. The speed trade-off enables more sophisticated optimization passes and plugin transformations that require multiple AST traversals.

Configuration Complexity→ tsup wins

tsup

Zero-configuration by default—automatically detects entry points, handles TypeScript compilation, and generates type definitions without setup files. Simple CLI flags handle most common scenarios. Configuration file optional for advanced needs.

rollup

Requires explicit configuration files defining input, output, plugins, and transformation rules. Even basic TypeScript support needs @rollup/plugin-typescript installation and configuration. More verbose but enables precise control over every bundling aspect.

Code Splitting Granularity→ rollup wins

tsup

Automatically groups code into chunks with limited manual control. Suitable for library bundling where aggressive splitting is unnecessary. Less granular than Rollup but avoids filesystem overhead from excessive file creation.

rollup

Superior code-splitting capabilities with manual chunk configuration, dynamic import optimization, and advanced entry point strategies. Can split every module individually, though this increases disk space usage due to minimum file sizes (~4KB per file).

TypeScript Integration→ tsup wins

tsup

Native TypeScript support with built-in compilation and type definition generation. No preprocessing required—handles .ts files directly. Includes automatic .d.ts bundling for library consumers without additional plugins.

rollup

Requires @rollup/plugin-typescript or similar plugins for TypeScript compilation. Type definition generation needs separate tooling or plugins. More setup steps but allows custom TypeScript compiler configurations and transformations.

Plugin Ecosystem→ rollup wins

tsup

Limited plugin ecosystem focused on common library bundling needs. Supports esbuild plugins but fewer options than Rollup. Most functionality built-in, reducing need for external plugins but limiting extensibility for unusual requirements.

rollup

Extensive plugin ecosystem with hundreds of official and community plugins. Highly composable architecture allows custom transformations, asset handling, and optimization strategies. Plugin API enables deep customization of bundling pipeline.

Tree Shaking Quality→ rollup wins

tsup

Effective tree shaking via esbuild for ES modules, removing unused exports reliably. Fast analysis but less sophisticated than Rollup's multi-pass approach. Sufficient for most library bundling scenarios where dependencies are well-structured.

rollup

Industry-leading tree shaking with deep static analysis across multiple passes. Better at eliminating unused code in complex dependency graphs and handling edge cases like side effects. Produces smaller bundles for applications with large dependency trees.

Verdict

Choose tsup for library bundling where build speed and developer experience matter most. Its zero-configuration approach eliminates setup friction, and esbuild's performance makes rapid iteration practical. The built-in TypeScript support and automatic type definition generation cover 90% of library author needs without plugin management. tsup is the pragmatic choice for npm packages, component libraries, and utility libraries where simplicity outweighs customization.

Choose Rollup for application bundling or libraries requiring advanced code-splitting strategies. The plugin ecosystem enables custom transformations that tsup cannot handle, and superior tree shaking produces smaller bundles in complex scenarios. Rollup's granular code-splitting control justifies the configuration overhead when optimizing load performance for web applications. If you need maximum flexibility, custom bundle formats, or integration with specialized build pipelines, Rollup's verbosity becomes an asset rather than a liability.

When to Use Each

If you are building an npm library for publication → use tsup because zero-configuration setup and fast builds accelerate development without sacrificing bundle quality.

If you are building a large-scale web application with complex code-splitting requirements → use Rollup because granular chunk control and advanced tree shaking optimize load performance for production deployments.

If you are creating a monorepo with multiple TypeScript packages → use tsup because consistent zero-config builds across packages reduce maintenance overhead and CI/CD time.

If you are building a library with custom asset transformations or non-standard build requirements → use Rollup because the extensive plugin ecosystem and configuration flexibility handle edge cases that tsup's opinionated approach cannot accommodate.

Learn More

tsup →rollup →

Head-to-Head

Build Speed→ tsup wins

tsup

rollup

Configuration Complexity→ tsup wins

tsup

rollup

Code Splitting Granularity→ rollup wins

tsup

rollup

TypeScript Integration→ tsup wins

tsup

rollup

Plugin Ecosystem→ rollup wins

tsup

rollup

Tree Shaking Quality→ rollup wins

tsup

rollup

Verdict

When to Use Each

If you are building an npm library for publication → use tsup because zero-configuration setup and fast builds accelerate development without sacrificing bundle quality.

If you are creating a monorepo with multiple TypeScript packages → use tsup because consistent zero-config builds across packages reduce maintenance overhead and CI/CD time.