head to head · open source
Ladybird vs javascript-obfuscator
Ladybird has 66,807 GitHub stars, 3,194 forks, 535 open issues and last shipped yesterday. javascript-obfuscator has 16,318 stars, 1,746 forks, 26 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Ladybird leads on adoption by 309% (66,807 vs 16,318 stars). Ladybird is written in C++ under BSD-2-Clause; javascript-obfuscator is written in TypeScript under BSD-2-Clause. Ladybird has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, javascript-obfuscator 11%. Ladybird was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (browser), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.
Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| Ladybird | javascript-obfuscator | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 67K | ★ 16K |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | BSD-2-Clause |
| Written in | C++ | TypeScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-11-02 |
| Forks | ⑂ 3.2K | ⑂ 1.7K |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick Ladybird if
- You weight community size — 67K stars and counting
- You want the BSD-2-Clause license terms
- Your stack matches C++
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick javascript-obfuscator if
- You want the javascript-obfuscator feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the BSD-2-Clause license terms
- Your stack matches TypeScript
- You evaluated both and javascript-obfuscator fits your workflow better
About Ladybird
Ladybird Ladybird is a truly independent web browser, using a novel engine based on web standards. [!IMPORTANT] Ladybird is in a pre alpha state, and only suitable for use by developers Features We aim to build a complete, usable browser for the modern web. Ladybird uses a multi process architecture with a main UI process, several WebContent renderer processes, an ImageDecoder process, and a RequestServer process. Image decoding and network connections are done out of process to be more robust against malicious content. Each tab has its own renderer process, which is sandboxed from the rest of the system. At the…
read the full Ladybird overview →
About javascript-obfuscator
JavaScript obfuscator :rocket: Obfuscator.io with VM Obfuscation Obfuscator.io adds VM based bytecode obfuscation to this package your JavaScript functions are compiled to custom bytecode that runs on an embedded virtual machine. Each build produces unique opcodes and VM structure, making reverse engineering and automated deobfuscation dramatically harder. Visit Obfuscator.io · Pro API methods This package provides access to Obfuscator.io API via CLI and Node.js API. Do you use JavaScript Obfuscator at your company? JavaScript Obfuscator has reached over 1 million npm downloads per week . I am currently…
read the full javascript-obfuscator overview →
More in Productivity & Utilities
Related comparisons
More Browsers & Extensions projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Browsers & Extensions field.
Frequently asked questions
Is Ladybird or javascript-obfuscator more popular?
Ladybird has 66,807 GitHub stars and javascript-obfuscator has 16,318. Ladybird has the larger community by that measure.
Are Ladybird and javascript-obfuscator free?
Both are open source. Ladybird is licensed under BSD-2-Clause and javascript-obfuscator under BSD-2-Clause. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Ladybird and javascript-obfuscator?
Ladybird is written in C++ and javascript-obfuscator in TypeScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, Ladybird or javascript-obfuscator?
Choose Ladybird if you want the larger community (66,807 stars) or its BSD-2-Clause licence terms. Choose javascript-obfuscator if its feature set, stack or BSD-2-Clause licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.