Version 6.0.0
A bcrypt library for NodeJS.
- Weekly Downloads
- 4.3M
- Bundle (gzip)
- 324.2 KB
- Updated
- Vulns
- 0
Side-by-side NPM package comparison
Smallest Bundle
Bcryptjs
32.9 KB gzipped
Most Popular
Bcryptjs
7.6M weekly downloads
Best Maintained
Bcrypt
100/100 maintenance score
Highest Quality
Bcrypt
50/100 quality score
Overall Pick
Bcryptjs
Best all-around based on popularity, size, maintenance & quality
Version 6.0.0
A bcrypt library for NodeJS.
Version 3.0.3
Optimized bcrypt in plain JavaScript with zero dependencies, with TypeScript support. Compatible to 'bcrypt'.
Choosing between Bcrypt and Bcryptjs? Here's a data-driven comparison based on real npm data — downloads, bundle size, health scores, and more — to help you decide which package fits your project best.
Bcryptjs leads with 7.6M weekly downloads — roughly 1.8x more. Bcrypt has 4.3M weekly downloads. Higher download counts generally indicate broader community adoption and a larger ecosystem of tutorials, plugins, and support.
Bcryptjs has the smallest gzipped bundle at 32.9 KB. Bcrypt comes in at 324.2 KB. A smaller bundle size means faster page loads, which improves user experience and Core Web Vitals scores.
Bcrypt has an overall health score of 85/100 (very good), with strong maintenance, security, popularity scores. Bcryptjs has an overall health score of 73/100 (good), with strong security, popularity scores. Health scores are calculated from maintenance activity, code quality, security posture, popularity, and stability metrics.
Choose Bcrypt if you value large community support, actively maintained, strong security track record. Choose Bcryptjs if you value large community support, strong security track record.
Both Bcrypt and Bcryptjs are solid choices for JavaScript development. Bcrypt has the edge in overall health score (85/100), while each package brings unique strengths to the table. Evaluate them based on your project's priorities — whether that's community size, bundle efficiency, or maintenance activity — and choose the one that aligns best with your requirements.
bcrypt and bcryptjs solve the same problem — password hashing using the bcrypt algorithm — but they differ fundamentally in implementation. bcrypt is a native C++ binding that requires node-gyp and a C++ compiler during npm install. bcryptjs is a pure JavaScript implementation with zero native dependencies. This difference has massive implications for bundle size, deployment size, and cross-platform compatibility.
For serverless deployments (AWS Lambda, Vercel Functions, Cloudflare Workers), bcryptjs is often the only viable option. Native bindings add significant overhead to cold starts and deployment packages — the compiled .node binary plus its dependencies can add several megabytes to your deployment artifact. bcryptjs ships a single JavaScript file with no binary artifacts, making it dramatically smaller in deployment size and universally compatible across all JavaScript runtimes including edge environments.
The trade-off is performance: bcrypt's native C++ implementation is roughly 3-4x faster for hashing operations. For most web applications handling a few hundred logins per minute, this difference is imperceptible — a bcryptjs hash with 10 salt rounds takes about 100ms vs 30ms for native bcrypt. If you're running a high-volume authentication service processing thousands of hash operations per second, bcrypt's native speed advantage matters. For everyone else — especially teams prioritizing deployment simplicity, smaller bundle sizes, and cross-platform compatibility — bcryptjs delivers identical security with a fraction of the deployment complexity.
One PDF: the best package for every category (ORMs, bundlers, auth, testing, state management). Used by 500+ devs. Free, updated monthly.