eslint vs prettier vs standard vs xo vs semistandard: Which is Better JavaScript Code Quality Tools?

Package	Downloads	Stars	Size	Issues	Publish	License

eslint	45,401,123	25,103	3.34 MB	92	12 days ago	MIT
prettier	42,714,153	49,417	7.7 MB	1,410	4 months ago	MIT
standard	533,691	29,131	164 kB	122	2 months ago	MIT
xo	78,593	7,699	68 kB	60	4 months ago	MIT
semistandard	21,913	1,411	47.6 kB	0	a year ago	MIT

eslint: ESLint offers extensive configuration options, allowing developers to define custom rules, environments, and plugins. This flexibility makes it suitable for various project types and coding styles, enabling teams to tailor the linter to their specific needs.
prettier: Prettier is designed with minimal configuration in mind, focusing solely on code formatting. It has a few options for customization, but the goal is to enforce a consistent style without extensive setup, making it easy to adopt.
standard: Standard is a no-configuration linter that enforces a strict set of rules. It prioritizes simplicity and consistency, which means developers have less flexibility but benefit from a straightforward approach to code quality.
xo: XO comes with sensible defaults and a focus on modern JavaScript features, offering some configuration options while promoting best practices. It strikes a balance between flexibility and ease of use, making it accessible for various projects.
semistandard: Semistandard provides a middle ground with a predefined set of rules based on Standard Style, while allowing some customization. It is less flexible than ESLint but more lenient than Standard, making it suitable for teams that want some control without complexity.

eslint: ESLint integrates seamlessly with most IDEs and text editors, providing real-time feedback as developers write code. This integration enhances the development experience by catching errors and enforcing rules on-the-fly.
prettier: Prettier also integrates well with various IDEs, allowing developers to format their code automatically on save. This feature streamlines the workflow and ensures consistent formatting without manual intervention.
standard: Standard can be integrated with IDEs, but it may not offer the same level of real-time feedback as ESLint. Developers can still benefit from its linting capabilities, but the experience may vary depending on the setup.
xo: XO supports integration with popular IDEs, providing real-time linting and feedback. It is designed to work smoothly within modern development environments, enhancing the coding experience.
semistandard: Semistandard can be integrated with IDEs, but it may require additional setup compared to ESLint. It still provides feedback during development, but the integration may not be as robust as ESLint's.

eslint: ESLint has a large and active community, with numerous plugins and extensions available. This extensive ecosystem allows developers to enhance its functionality and adapt it to various frameworks and libraries.
prettier: Prettier has gained significant popularity and has a growing community. While its ecosystem is not as extensive as ESLint's, it is widely adopted and supported by many projects, ensuring compatibility with various tools.
standard: Standard has a dedicated community that values its simplicity and strictness. However, its ecosystem is not as rich as ESLint's, which may limit its extensibility for specific needs.
xo: XO has a smaller but passionate community, with a focus on modern JavaScript practices. Its ecosystem is growing, but it may not yet match the breadth of ESLint's offerings.
semistandard: Semistandard has a smaller community compared to ESLint and Prettier, but it is still supported by developers who appreciate its semi-strict approach. Its ecosystem is limited, focusing primarily on its predefined rules.

eslint: ESLint has a moderate learning curve due to its extensive configuration options and rule sets. New users may need some time to understand how to customize it effectively, but the documentation is comprehensive and helpful.
prettier: Prettier has a low learning curve, as it is straightforward to use with minimal configuration. Developers can quickly adopt it without needing to understand complex rules or settings.
standard: Standard has a low learning curve due to its zero-configuration philosophy. Developers can start using it immediately without needing to configure rules, making it easy to adopt.
xo: XO has a moderate learning curve, as it introduces some modern JavaScript concepts. However, its sensible defaults and clear documentation help new users get up to speed quickly.
semistandard: Semistandard has a relatively easy learning curve, especially for those familiar with Standard Style. Its semi-strict approach makes it accessible while still enforcing some coding standards.

eslint: ESLint can be slower on larger codebases due to its extensive rule set and configuration options. However, performance can be improved by optimizing the configuration and using caching features.
prettier: Prettier is designed for performance and typically runs quickly, even on larger files. Its focus on formatting rather than linting allows it to operate efficiently without significant overhead.
standard: Standard performs well due to its strict rule set and zero-configuration approach. However, its performance can vary based on the complexity of the codebase and the rules being enforced.
xo: XO is optimized for performance, leveraging modern JavaScript features to provide fast linting and formatting. It aims to maintain efficiency while enforcing best practices.
semistandard: Semistandard's performance is generally good, but it may not be as fast as Prettier for formatting tasks. It balances linting and performance, making it suitable for most projects.