Side-by-side NPM package comparison
Version 1.6.0
An image processing library written entirely in JavaScript.
Version 0.34.5
High performance Node.js image processing, the fastest module to resize JPEG, PNG, WebP, GIF, AVIF and TIFF images
Version 0.0.0
Choosing between Jimp and Sharp and Squoosh? 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.
Sharp leads with 41.9M weekly downloads — roughly 16.7x more. Jimp has 2.5M weekly downloads. Squoosh has 253 weekly downloads. Higher download counts generally indicate broader community adoption and a larger ecosystem of tutorials, plugins, and support.
Squoosh has the smallest gzipped bundle at 22.0 B. Sharp comes in at 34.3 KB. Jimp comes in at 204.2 KB. A smaller bundle size means faster page loads, which improves user experience and Core Web Vitals scores.
Sharp has an overall health score of 79/100 (very good), with strong maintenance, security, popularity scores. Jimp has an overall health score of 61/100 (good), with strong security, popularity scores. Squoosh has an overall health score of 45/100 (moderate), with strong security scores. Health scores are calculated from maintenance activity, code quality, security posture, popularity, and stability metrics.
Choose Jimp if you value large community support, strong security track record. Choose Sharp if you value massive community and ecosystem, strong security track record. Choose Squoosh if you value minimal bundle footprint, strong security track record.
Both Jimp and Sharp and Squoosh are solid choices for JavaScript development. Sharp has the edge in overall health score (79/100), 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.