Benchmark: String.includes() vs. String.matchAll

Script Preparation code:

var string = '{{ vars.test }}';
var startDelim = '{{';
var endDelim = '}}';
var matcher = new RegExp(`${startDelim}((?!${endDelim}).+?)${endDelim}`, 'g');

Tests:

String.includes()
string.includes(startDelim) && string.includes(endDelim);
String.matchAll()
string.matchAll(matcher);

Rendered benchmark preparation results:

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Previous results

Test case name	Result
String.includes()
String.matchAll()

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: 11 months ago)

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_15_7) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/110.0.0.0 Safari/537.36

Browser/OS: Chrome 110 on Mac OS X 10.15.7

View result in a separate tab

Test name	Executions per second
String.includes()	3763542.0 Ops/sec
String.matchAll()	3891718.0 Ops/sec

String.includes() vs. String.matchAll (version: 0)

Comparing performance of: String.includes() vs String.matchAll()

Created: 11 months ago by: Guest

Jump to the latest result

String.includes()

String.matchAll()

Suite status: <idle, ready to run>

Experimental features:

Fastest: N/A

Slowest: N/A