MobX vs Redux: Comparison – Which Performs Better?

Comparing the two technical aspects is not new, and here we are doing it for 2 tech stacks i.e. MobX and Redux. See, we believe each technical concept has its own significance, and its utilization depends upon the requirement of the project along with the comfort of a developer.

By offering MobX and Redux development services in India & USA, we are very well aware of both concepts. Before analyzing the difference between Redux and MobX, we should understand both concepts individually.

It will help in relating their performances on various parameters. As we know, both of them, MobX and Redux are well-known state management libraries of the present era. Do you know why we need a statement management library? If not, here you go:

If the developer has developed an application using ReactJS which is a component-based library, each component will maintain its own local state. Usually, the state of the application is maintained by the root component.

Being a developer or a technical person, you may know, various components will keep interacting with the state data at the allocated time. Also, they will change the data before reversing it to the server. Now, what happens?

The application comes out to be more complex and it further increases the difficulty level. Moreover, it may be possible that the state of the component becomes unpredictable, and debugging will also become lengthy.

The evolution of state management systems like MobX and Redux acted as a boon for the developers, and there is no need to make the process complex. The function of the state management system is to move the state out of the component as solely a testable unit.

Further, there is a method to synchronize the react components with the application state. Now the process will be light. Also, the debugging process will be frequent because now the data comes from a single source, unlike the traditional methods.

The difference between Redux and MobX is explained in the proceeding sections.

Redux: Dan Abramov and Andrew Clark have found the statement management system in the year 2015. The definition of Redux is as a predictable state container for applications built using JavaScript.

Further, Redux follows the architecture of Facebook’s flux, and its functional concepts are based on the programming language Elm.

MobX: With the implementation of TFRP (Transparently applying Functional Reactive Programming), the intent of MobX is to make state management smooth, stable, and uncomplicated. Here, the library (Mobx) uses a single object tree to store the entire application.

Mobx Vs. Redux - Purity

The first parameter is Purity, for which we will analyze MobX Vs. Redux performance.

• MobX: By using MobX, developers can update the states by overwriting the new rules. Thus, the library is impure. You may find its implementation easier but debugging, or maintenance may become challenging because of unpredictable outputs.
• Redux: On the other hand, to store the states, Redux uses the stand-alone and immutable source of truth. It means developers will not be able to make changes like MobX because the states will be in read-only mode. Further, action will be invoked to overwrite a state in the case of Redux. Redux is pure because you get a state, action, and a returned new state.

Conclusion: The point goes to Redux.

MobX Vs. Redux - Boilerplate Code: 

• MobX: The library packs the least boilerplate, and its nature is implicit.
• Redux: The main disadvantage of Redux is its sheer volume of boilerplate code, and it is majorly in the React applications.

Conclusion: Clearly, the point goes to MobX.

MobX Vs. Redux - Debugging:

Debugging is the most required parameter in order to check Mobx Vs. Redux performance.

• MobX: By reading the above content, you must have experienced that MobX works on abstraction as a result of which, debugging becomes challenging. Moreover, the library does not have an efficient tool for testing and debugging.
• Redux: As stated above, debugging is predictable when we work using Redux. Here a mechanism for synchronization is available that makes the process easy and debugging simple.

Conclusion: The point goes to Redux.

MobX Vs. Redux - The logic of Data Flow: 

• MobX: MobX is based on unidirectional data flow. But here, the update is done without action or event. Because of that, other views are also affected, and the output becomes unpredictable.
• Redux: The concept of Redux also follows a strict unidirectional data flow. For any update, there is a need to invoke an action.

Conclusion: The point goes to Redux.

MobX Vs. Redux - Data Store:

• MobX: In the case of MobX minimum of two stores are used in which one store has a UI state, and the other has a domain state. With two separate stores, reusability is possible. Also, you can do universal testing easily on the domain state. (Domain State: Server-Side Application State).
• Redux: A single store is used in Redux to store an application that further makes debugging easier. Moreover, here, the state is immutable, and the previous state is saved towards each new state, hence time travel is possible here.

Conclusion: Depends on the requirement. 

Now, which is better between MobX Vs. Redux:

In this world, nothing can fit all the sizes, and the same goes here. Selecting any of the state management systems will depend on the developer’s call because he knows the requirement in actuality. Pros and cons are everywhere.

We have shared the difference between Redux and MobX to keep you aware of both concepts. Now, we need to analyze the requirement and then go for the technology as the ultimate aim is quality execution.

We at Linearloop have expertise in both technologies and have delivered lots of projects successfully across the world. Our team analyses the requirement first and then chooses the required library to start the project. So hire redux developer in India from Linearloop and take your project to the next level.

Read More:

An in-depth Comparison between Kafka and Message Queue