StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Application & Data
  3. Microframeworks
  4. Microframeworks
  5. Aqueduct vs TypeORM

Aqueduct vs TypeORM

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Aqueduct
Aqueduct
Stacks17
Followers48
Votes9
GitHub Stars2.4K
Forks275
TypeORM
TypeORM
Stacks757
Followers813
Votes81
GitHub Stars36.0K
Forks6.5K

Aqueduct vs TypeORM: What are the differences?

<Write Introduction here>
  1. Code-first approach: Aqueduct follows a code-first approach where database schema is generated based on the Dart classes defining the model. On the other hand, TypeORM supports both code-first and database-first approaches by allowing developers to define entities from existing databases or generate database schema from entities.

  2. Language support: Aqueduct is specifically tailored for Dart, making it an ideal choice for developers working in Dart or Flutter projects. In comparison, TypeORM supports a wide range of programming languages such as JavaScript, TypeScript, Python, and more, providing more flexibility for developers working in multiple environments.

  3. Query Language: Aqueduct uses its own query language, which is specifically designed for high-performance database operations. TypeORM, on the other hand, supports standard SQL and also provides methods for creating complex queries using its QueryBuilder API.

  4. ORM Features: Aqueduct provides a rich set of ORM features out of the box, including support for relationships, migrations, and data validation. TypeORM offers similar features but also includes additional functionalities like lazy loading, listeners, and tree-based entity structures, providing more options for managing data relationships and operations.

  5. Community and Documentation: Aqueduct has a smaller community compared to TypeORM, which may lead to fewer resources and support available online. TypeORM, being a more popular ORM, has a larger community and extensive documentation, making it easier for developers to find solutions to common issues and learn new features.

  6. Performance and Scalability: Aqueduct is optimized for high-performance applications and features lightweight asynchronous operations, making it a suitable choice for applications with high traffic and demanding performance requirements. TypeORM, while also capable of handling large-scale applications, may require additional configuration and optimization for optimal performance in such scenarios.

In Summary, Aqueduct and TypeORM differ in their approach to schema generation, language support, query language, ORM features, community support, and performance optimizations.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

Aqueduct
Aqueduct
TypeORM
TypeORM

Aqueduct is an open source, server-side web framework written in Google’s Dart language. Aqueduct promises faster development, experimentation and testing – without sacrificing power.

It supports both Active Record and Data Mapper patterns, unlike all other JavaScript ORMs currently in existence, which means you can write high quality, loosely coupled, scalable, maintainable applications the most productive way.

Adheres to semantic versioning
automatically create the database table schemes based on your models; transparently insert / update / delete to the database your objects; map your selections from tables to JavaScript objects and map table columns to object properties; easily create one-to-one, many-to-one, one-to-many and many-to-many relations between tables; and much more.
Statistics
GitHub Stars
2.4K
GitHub Stars
36.0K
GitHub Forks
275
GitHub Forks
6.5K
Stacks
17
Stacks
757
Followers
48
Followers
813
Votes
9
Votes
81
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 4
    Fast
  • 3
    Aqueduct is the future
  • 2
    Dart on the server
Pros
  • 30
    Typescript
  • 12
    Supports MySQL, PostgreSQL, MariaDB, SQLite, MS SQL Ser
  • 9
    Cons of TypeORM
  • 9
    Easy setup
  • 7
    Promise Based
Cons
  • 5
    Completely abandoned by its creator
  • 3
    Too complex for what it does
  • 2
    Doesn't really support native javascript
  • 1
    Cannot use query on any relation
  • 1
    Not proper/real type safety
Integrations
OAuth2
OAuth2
Dart
Dart
PostgreSQL
PostgreSQL
No integrations available

What are some alternatives to Aqueduct, TypeORM?

ExpressJS

ExpressJS

Express is a minimal and flexible node.js web application framework, providing a robust set of features for building single and multi-page, and hybrid web applications.

Django REST framework

Django REST framework

It is a powerful and flexible toolkit that makes it easy to build Web APIs.

Sails.js

Sails.js

Sails is designed to mimic the MVC pattern of frameworks like Ruby on Rails, but with support for the requirements of modern apps: data-driven APIs with scalable, service-oriented architecture.

Sinatra

Sinatra

Sinatra is a DSL for quickly creating web applications in Ruby with minimal effort.

Lumen

Lumen

Laravel Lumen is a stunningly fast PHP micro-framework for building web applications with expressive, elegant syntax. We believe development must be an enjoyable, creative experience to be truly fulfilling. Lumen attempts to take the pain out of development by easing common tasks used in the majority of web projects, such as routing, database abstraction, queueing, and caching.

Slim

Slim

Slim is easy to use for both beginners and professionals. Slim favors cleanliness over terseness and common cases over edge cases. Its interface is simple, intuitive, and extensively documented — both online and in the code itself.

Fastify

Fastify

Fastify is a web framework highly focused on speed and low overhead. It is inspired from Hapi and Express and as far as we know, it is one of the fastest web frameworks in town. Use Fastify can increase your throughput up to 100%.

Falcon

Falcon

Falcon is a minimalist WSGI library for building speedy web APIs and app backends. We like to think of Falcon as the Dieter Rams of web frameworks.

hapi

hapi

hapi is a simple to use configuration-centric framework with built-in support for input validation, caching, authentication, and other essential facilities for building web applications and services.

FeathersJS

FeathersJS

Feathers is a real-time, micro-service web framework for NodeJS that gives you control over your data via RESTful resources, sockets and flexible plug-ins.

Related Comparisons

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot

Liquibase
Flyway

Flyway vs Liquibase