Honest, reproducible performance benchmarks: forceCalendar vs FullCalendar (and the rrule library). We publish every number — including the ones we lose — because trust matters more than marketing.
- Bundle size — installed size of the full forceCalendar stack (
@forcecalendar/core+@forcecalendar/interface) vs the equivalent FullCalendar stack (core + daygrid + timegrid + list + rrule plugin + rrule) - Recurrence expansion — RFC 5545 RRULE scenarios (daily, weekly, monthly, yearly, multi-year) measured with tinybench, ops/sec and average latency
We deliberately do not benchmark rendering or memory: @forcecalendar/core is DOM-free, so a rendering comparison against a full-UI library would not be apples-to-apples.
npm install
npm run benchmark # runs all suites, writes results/latest.json
npm run update-dashboard # regenerates www/data/benchmarkResults.js
npm run benchmark:full # bothResults include exact package versions and environment info (Node version, platform, arch) for reproducibility.
www/ contains a static Next.js + Chart.js dashboard that visualizes results/latest.json. Benchmarks re-run automatically when @forcecalendar/core publishes a release (via repository_dispatch).
Found a benchmark that's unfair to either side? That's a bug — please open an issue. See the contributing guide.