pnpm vs yarn vs bower
JavaScript Package Managers Comparison
1 Year
pnpmyarnbowerSimilar Packages:
What's JavaScript Package Managers?

JavaScript package managers are essential tools for managing project dependencies, automating the installation of libraries, and ensuring consistent versions across development environments. They simplify the process of including external libraries in projects, allowing developers to focus on writing code rather than managing dependencies manually. Each package manager has its own unique features and workflows, making them suitable for different types of projects and development styles.

Package Weekly Downloads Trend
Github Stars Ranking
Stat Detail
Package
Downloads
Stars
Size
Issues
Publish
License
pnpm20,913,82730,90018.7 MB1,78522 days agoMIT
yarn5,826,00841,5015.34 MB2,067a year agoBSD-2-Clause
bower333,057-20 MB--MIT
Feature Comparison: pnpm vs yarn vs bower

Installation Speed

  • pnpm:

    pnpm is designed for speed, utilizing a content-addressable storage system that allows for faster installations. It avoids duplicating dependencies, leading to quicker setup times, especially in projects with many shared packages.

  • yarn:

    Yarn is known for its speed, thanks to its caching mechanism that allows for offline installations. Once a package is installed, it can be reused without needing to fetch it again, significantly speeding up subsequent installations.

  • bower:

    Bower's installation speed is generally fast, but it does not optimize for disk space or caching like newer tools. It installs packages directly from the repository, which can lead to longer installation times for large projects with many dependencies.

Dependency Management

  • pnpm:

    pnpm uses a unique symlink strategy to manage dependencies, ensuring that each package has its own version while avoiding duplication. This approach helps maintain a clean node_modules structure and reduces conflicts between dependencies.

  • yarn:

    Yarn provides a lockfile mechanism that ensures consistent installations across different environments. It also supports workspaces, allowing for better management of monorepos and interdependent packages.

  • bower:

    Bower manages front-end dependencies and is focused on client-side libraries. It uses a flat dependency structure, which can lead to version conflicts if multiple packages require different versions of the same library.

Community and Ecosystem

  • pnpm:

    pnpm is gaining traction in the JavaScript community, especially among developers looking for efficient package management solutions. Its ecosystem is growing, but it is still smaller compared to npm and Yarn.

  • yarn:

    Yarn has a strong community and is widely adopted in the JavaScript ecosystem. It integrates well with other tools and frameworks, making it a popular choice among developers.

  • bower:

    Bower has seen a decline in usage as newer tools like npm and Yarn have become more popular. Its community support is limited, and many libraries have shifted to using npm or Yarn for dependency management.

Configuration and Customization

  • pnpm:

    pnpm offers a flexible configuration system that allows developers to customize the installation process and behavior through a pnpmfile.js. This enables advanced use cases and optimizations.

  • yarn:

    Yarn provides extensive configuration options through its .yarnrc file, allowing developers to customize various aspects of the package management process, including caching, network settings, and more.

  • bower:

    Bower's configuration is straightforward, using a simple JSON file (bower.json) to manage dependencies. However, it lacks advanced features for customization and configuration compared to newer tools.

Offline Capabilities

  • pnpm:

    pnpm supports offline installations by caching packages locally, allowing developers to install dependencies without an internet connection after the initial setup.

  • yarn:

    Yarn excels in offline capabilities, as it caches every package it downloads. This means that once a package is installed, it can be reused without needing to fetch it again, making it ideal for development environments with limited internet access.

  • bower:

    Bower does not have built-in support for offline installations, requiring an internet connection to fetch packages each time they are needed.

How to Choose: pnpm vs yarn vs bower
  • pnpm:

    Choose pnpm if you are looking for a fast and efficient package manager that saves disk space by using a unique symlink strategy. pnpm is ideal for monorepos and projects with many dependencies, as it ensures that packages are installed in a way that minimizes duplication and maximizes speed.

  • yarn:

    Choose Yarn if you need a package manager that offers a robust feature set, including offline capabilities, workspaces for managing multiple packages, and a focus on performance. Yarn is particularly beneficial for larger projects and teams that require a reliable and efficient dependency management solution.

  • bower:

    Choose Bower if you are working on a front-end project that requires managing client-side libraries and you prefer a simple, flat dependency structure. Bower is particularly useful for projects that rely heavily on front-end frameworks and libraries, but it has been largely superseded by other tools.

README for pnpm

简体中文 | 日本語 | 한국어 | Italiano | Português Brasileiro

pnpm

Fast, disk space efficient package manager:

  • Fast. Up to 2x faster than the alternatives (see benchmark).
  • Efficient. Files inside node_modules are linked from a single content-addressable storage.
  • Great for monorepos.
  • Strict. A package can access only dependencies that are specified in its package.json.
  • Deterministic. Has a lockfile called pnpm-lock.yaml.
  • Works as a Node.js version manager. See pnpm env use.
  • Works everywhere. Supports Windows, Linux, and macOS.
  • Battle-tested. Used in production by teams of all sizes since 2016.
  • See the full feature comparison with npm and Yarn.

To quote the Rush team:

Microsoft uses pnpm in Rush repos with hundreds of projects and hundreds of PRs per day, and we’ve found it to be very fast and reliable.

npm version Join the chat at Discord OpenCollective OpenCollective X Follow Stand With Ukraine

Platinum Sponsors

Bit Bit

Gold Sponsors

Discord u|screen
JetBrains Nx
CodeRabbit Route4Me
Workleap

Silver Sponsors

Leniolabs_ Vercel Depot
moonrepo devowl.io Cerbos
vlt Vite
Vite

Support this project by becoming a sponsor.

Background

pnpm uses a content-addressable filesystem to store all files from all module directories on a disk. When using npm, if you have 100 projects using lodash, you will have 100 copies of lodash on disk. With pnpm, lodash will be stored in a content-addressable storage, so:

  1. If you depend on different versions of lodash, only the files that differ are added to the store. If lodash has 100 files, and a new version has a change only in one of those files, pnpm update will only add 1 new file to the storage.
  2. All the files are saved in a single place on the disk. When packages are installed, their files are linked from that single place consuming no additional disk space. Linking is performed using either hard-links or reflinks (copy-on-write).

As a result, you save gigabytes of space on your disk and you have a lot faster installations! If you'd like more details about the unique node_modules structure that pnpm creates and why it works fine with the Node.js ecosystem, read this small article: Flat node_modules is not the only way.

💖 Like this project? Let people know with a tweet

Installation

For installation options visit our website.

Usage

Just use pnpm in place of npm/Yarn. E.g., install dependencies via:

pnpm install

For more advanced usage, read pnpm CLI on our website, or run pnpm help.

Benchmark

pnpm is up to 2x faster than npm and Yarn classic. See all benchmarks here.

Benchmarks on an app with lots of dependencies:

Support

License

MIT