Run results for: Lodash vs Ramda vs Underscore 1.9.0

Run details:

User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 6.0.1; SM-N915V) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/71.0.3578.99 Mobile Safari/537.36

Browser: Chrome Mobile 71

Operating system: Android 6.0.1

Device Platform: Mobile

Date tested: 5 years ago

Test name	Executions per second
Lodash	198.2 Ops/sec
Ramda without relying on currying or composition	149.1 Ops/sec
Ramda with currying and composition	133.3 Ops/sec
Underscore	222.9 Ops/sec

HTML Preparation code:

<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/ramda/0.25.0/ramda.js"></script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/lodash.js/4.17.4/lodash.js"></script>
<script type="text/javascript">
  window.lodash = _;
  _ = null;
</script>
<script src="https://cdnjs.cloudflare.com/ajax/libs/underscore.js/1.9.0/underscore.js"></script>

Script Preparation code:

  var data = _.range(10000).map(function(i) {
    return {
      counter: i
    }
  });
  
  function isOdd(num) {
    return num % 2 === 1;
  }
  
  function square(num) {
    return num * num;
  }
  
  function lessThanThreeDigits(num) {
    return num.toString().length < 3;
  }

Tests:

Lodash
var result = lodash.chain(data) .map(item => item.counter) .filter(isOdd) .map(square) .filter(lessThanThreeDigits) .value();
Ramda without relying on currying or composition
var result = R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits, R.map(square, R.filter(isOdd, R.pluck('counter', data))));
Ramda with currying and composition
var result = R.pipe( R.pluck('counter'), R.filter(isOdd), R.map(square), R.filter(lessThanThreeDigits) )(data);
Underscore
var result = _.chain(data) .map(item => item.counter) .filter(isOdd) .map(square) .filter(lessThanThreeDigits) .value();

Run results for: Lodash vs Ramda vs Underscore 1.9.0

Lodash

Ramda without relying on currying or composition

Ramda with currying and composition

Underscore