Head-to-Head: Aphrodite vs Bulma Analysis


v2.4.0(about 4 years ago)

This package was last published over a year ago. It may not be actively maintained.Types definitions are bundled with the npm packageNumber of direct dependencies: 3Monthly npm downloads

Aphrodite is a JavaScript library for styling web applications. It provides an inline styling system that generates CSS at runtime. Unlike traditional CSS, Aphrodite provides a way to define styles dynamically using JavaScript objects. This allows for granular control over styles and enables styling based on dynamic data.

Alternatives: styled-components, emotion, jss

Tags: javascriptcss-in-jsstylingruntime-css


v0.9.4(over 1 year ago)

This package was last published over a year ago. It may not be actively maintained.The package doesn't have any types definitionsNumber of direct dependencies: 0Monthly npm downloads

Bulma is a modern, open-source, and CSS-based design framework. It provides a set of widgets, utilities, and standardized styles that allow developers to quickly create responsive and user-friendly websites. Bulma emphasizes on mobile-first designs and provides a clean and consistent look-and-feel to your website. As it is built using CSS, developers have the freedom to use it with any front-end library or framework of their choice.

Alternatives: bootstrap, foundation, semantic-ui

Tags: cssdesign-systemresponsiveflexboxmobile-first



Bulma is a highly popular CSS framework known for its simplicity and flexibility. It has a large community and is widely used in web development. Aphrodite, on the other hand, is a CSS-in-JS library developed by Facebook and is not as widely known or popular as Bulma.

CSS-in-JS vs CSS framework

Aphrodite is a CSS-in-JS library that allows you to write CSS styles in JavaScript. It provides a way to dynamically generate and manage CSS styles at runtime. Bulma, on the other hand, is a traditional CSS framework that provides pre-defined styles and components.

Customization and Theming

Aphrodite offers more flexibility when it comes to customization and theming. Since CSS is written in JavaScript, you can easily manipulate styles using logic and dynamically create styles based on application state. Bulma, while customizable to some extent, is more opinionated and provides a specific set of styles and components.

Learning Curve

Bulma has a shallow learning curve as it offers pre-built classes that can be directly applied to HTML elements. It is easy to get started with Bulma, especially for developers already familiar with CSS frameworks. Aphrodite, being a CSS-in-JS library, has a steeper learning curve as it requires understanding of JavaScript and the library's API for managing and applying styles.

Integration with React

Aphrodite is specifically designed for React and integrates well with the React component model. It has a small footprint and can easily be used alongside other React libraries. Bulma, being a CSS framework, can be used with any JavaScript framework including React.

Community and Support

Bulma has a large and active community and there are plenty of resources, tutorials, and third-party libraries available to enhance the development experience. Aphrodite, while backed by Facebook, has a smaller community and fewer resources compared to Bulma.