Benchmark: RegEx.test vs. String.includes larger

Script Preparation code:

var string = "Hello world123!";
var regex = /(abc|bcd|cde|def|efg|fgh|ghi|hij|ijk|jkl|klm|lmn|mno|nop|opq|pqr|qrs|rst|stu|tuv|uvw|vwx|wxy|xyz|012|123|234|345|456|567|678|789)+/i;

Tests:

RegEx.test
regex.test(string);
String.includes
string.includes("abc", "bcd", "cde", "def", "efg", "fgh", "ghi", "hij", "ijk", "jkl", "klm", "lmn", "mno", "nop", "opq", "pqr", "qrs", "rst", "stu", "tuv", "uvw", "vwx", "wxy", "xyz", "012", "123", "234", "345", "456", "567", "678", "789")

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
RegEx.test
String.includes

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A

ⓘ Get performance results from real users on your website with Request Metrics.

Website Performance Monitoring by Request Metrics

Latest run results:

Run details: (Test run date: 2 years ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 15_1_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/605.1.15 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/15.1 Mobile/15E148 Safari/604.1

Browser/OS: Mobile Safari 15 on iOS 15.1.1

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
RegEx.test	1335680.0 Ops/sec
String.includes	4045274.0 Ops/sec

RegEx.test vs. String.includes larger (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: RegEx.test vs String.includes

Created: 2 years ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

RegEx.test

String.includes

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A