head to head · open source

motion vs webgradients

motion has 33,697 GitHub stars, 1,368 forks, 112 open issues and last shipped yesterday. webgradients has 2,478 stars, 140 forks, 0 open issues and last shipped 2 months ago. motion leads on adoption by 1,260% (33,697 vs 2,478 stars). motion is written in TypeScript under MIT; webgradients is written in CSS under MIT. motion has attracted 4% as many forks as stars, webgradients 6%. motion was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

motion ★ 34K webgradients ★ 2.5K category Miscellaneous

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

motion webgradients
GitHub stars ★ 34K ★ 2.5K
License MIT MIT
Written in TypeScript CSS
Last push 2026-09-22 2026-08-03
Forks ⑂ 1.4K ⑂ 140
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick motion if

  • You weight community size — 34K stars and counting
  • You want the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches TypeScript
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full motion profile →

pick webgradients if

  • You want the webgradients feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the MIT license terms
  • Your stack matches CSS
  • You evaluated both and webgradients fits your workflow better

full webgradients profile →

About motion

Motion is an open source, MIT licensed animation library for React, JavaScript and Vue that provides a simple API and a hybrid engine for 120fps, GPU accelerated animation.

read the full motion overview →

About webgradients

WebGradients is a curated, MIT licensed collection of 180 ready made gradients distributed as CSS3, Sketch, PSD and Figma assets alongside a machine readable JSON dataset, aimed at frontend developers, designers and AI agent builders who need polished background colour treatments without composing them from scratch.

read the full webgradients overview →

More in Miscellaneous

firecrawl ★ 183K Godot ★ 118K three.js ★ 116K ant-design ★ 100K open-design ★ 98K manim ★ 94K

Related comparisons

ant-design vs open-design ant-design vs manim open-design vs manim firecrawl vs openpencil firecrawl vs draw-io firecrawl vs plasmic firecrawl vs quant-ux firecrawl vs grida firecrawl vs godot godot vs three-js firecrawl vs gdevelop firecrawl vs monogame godot vs imgui three-js vs imgui firecrawl vs sbox godot vs bevy firecrawl vs playwright firecrawl vs crawl4ai firecrawl vs novu firecrawl vs searxng firecrawl vs postiz firecrawl vs cap firecrawl vs openseo firecrawl vs keploy

More Design & Prototyping projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Design & Prototyping field.

motion vs ant-design motion vs open-design motion vs manim motion vs anime motion vs hyperframes motion vs daisyui motion vs tabler motion vs layui motion vs lottie-ios motion vs vant motion vs primitives motion vs mojs

Frequently asked questions

Is motion or webgradients more popular?

motion has 33,697 GitHub stars and webgradients has 2,478. motion has the larger community by that measure.

Are motion and webgradients free?

Both are open source. motion is licensed under MIT and webgradients under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between motion and webgradients?

motion is written in TypeScript and webgradients in CSS. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, motion or webgradients?

Choose motion if you want the larger community (33,697 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose webgradients if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.