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. DevOps
  3. Testing Frameworks
  4. Javascript Testing Framework
  5. AVA vs Mocha

AVA vs Mocha

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Mocha
Mocha
Stacks10.8K
Followers3.0K
Votes430
AVA
AVA
Stacks105
Followers205
Votes32

AVA vs Mocha: What are the differences?

## Key Differences between AVA and Mocha

AVA and Mocha are both popular JavaScript testing frameworks, but they have some key differences that set them apart. 

1. **Concurrency**: AVA runs tests concurrently, allowing for faster test execution compared to Mocha, which runs tests sequentially. This can be beneficial for large test suites as it helps in reducing overall testing time.
2. **Syntax**: Mocha uses a simple and flexible syntax, making it easier for beginners to get started with testing. On the other hand, AVA uses a more opinionated syntax that enforces certain testing practices, providing a more structured approach to writing tests.
3. **Isolation**: AVA sandboxes each test file, running them in parallel to prevent any interference between tests. In contrast, Mocha runs all tests within the same process, potentially causing issues with test data leaking between tests.
4. **Installation**: Mocha requires additional setup and installation of assertion libraries like Chai, while AVA comes bundled with its own assertion library. This makes AVA a more lightweight and self-sufficient solution for testing.
5. **Asynchronous Testing**: AVA natively supports promises and async/await syntax for handling asynchronous operations, making it easier to write and maintain asynchronous tests. Mocha, on the other hand, may require additional setup or plugins to enable this functionality.
6. **Configuration**: Mocha provides more flexibility in configuration options, allowing users to customize test runners, reporters, and other settings. AVA, on the other hand, comes with a minimalistic configuration approach, which may be preferred by those looking for simplicity.

In Summary, AVA and Mocha differ in terms of concurrency, syntax, isolation, installation, asynchronous testing support, and configuration options.

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

Advice on Mocha, AVA

Abigail
Abigail

Dec 10, 2019

Decided

We use Mocha for our FDA verification testing. It's integrated into Meteor, our upstream web application framework. We like how battle tested it is, its' syntax, its' options of reporters, and countless other features. Most everybody can agree on mocha, and that gets us half-way through our FDA verification and validation (V&V) testing strategy.

231k views231k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Mocha
Mocha
AVA
AVA

Mocha is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running on node.js and the browser, making asynchronous testing simple and fun. Mocha tests run serially, allowing for flexible and accurate reporting, while mapping uncaught exceptions to the correct test cases.

Even though JavaScript is single-threaded, IO in Node.js can happen in parallel due to its async nature. AVA takes advantage of this and runs your tests concurrently, which is especially beneficial for IO heavy tests. In addition, test files are run in parallel as separate processes, giving you even better performance and an isolated environment for each test file.

browser support;simple async support, including promises;test coverage reporting;string diff support;javascript API for running tests;proper exit status for CI support etc;auto-detects and disables coloring for non-ttys;maps uncaught exceptions to the correct test case;async test timeout support;test-specific timeouts;growl notification support;reports test durations;highlights slow tests;file watcher support;global variable leak detection
-
Statistics
Stacks
10.8K
Stacks
105
Followers
3.0K
Followers
205
Votes
430
Votes
32
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 137
    Open source
  • 102
    Simple
  • 81
    Promise support
  • 48
    Flexible
  • 29
    Easy to add support for Generators
Cons
  • 3
    Cannot test a promisified functions without assertion
  • 2
    No assertion count in results
  • 1
    Not as many reporter options as Jest
Pros
  • 12
    Simple and fast
  • 6
    Parallel test running
  • 5
    Open source
  • 3
    Test code Instrumenting
  • 3
    Promise support
Cons
  • 1
    No built-in support for DOM
  • 1
    No source files compilation

What are some alternatives to Mocha, AVA?

Jasmine

Jasmine

Jasmine is a Behavior Driven Development testing framework for JavaScript. It does not rely on browsers, DOM, or any JavaScript framework. Thus it's suited for websites, Node.js projects, or anywhere that JavaScript can run.

Jest

Jest

Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.

Cypress

Cypress

Cypress is a front end automated testing application created for the modern web. Cypress is built on a new architecture and runs in the same run-loop as the application being tested. As a result Cypress provides better, faster, and more reliable testing for anything that runs in a browser. Cypress works on any front-end framework or website.

CodeceptJS

CodeceptJS

It is a modern end to end testing framework with a special BDD-style syntax. The test is written as a linear scenario of user's action on a site. Each test is described inside a Scenario function with I object passed into it.

Protractor

Protractor

Protractor is an end-to-end test framework for Angular and AngularJS applications. Protractor runs tests against your application running in a real browser, interacting with it as a user would.

Ghost Inspector

Ghost Inspector

It lets you create and manage UI tests that check specific functionality in your website or application. We execute these automated browser tests continuously from the cloud and alert you if anything breaks.

QUnit

QUnit

QUnit is a powerful, easy-to-use JavaScript unit testing framework. It's used by the jQuery, jQuery UI and jQuery Mobile projects and is capable of testing any generic JavaScript code, including itself!

Sorry-cypress

Sorry-cypress

Open-source, self-hosted alternative Cypress Dashboard.

Baretest

Baretest

It is a fast and simple JavaScript test runner. It offers near-instant performance and a brainless API. It makes testing tolerable.

SinonJS

SinonJS

It is a really helpful library when you want to unit test your code. It supports spies, stubs, and mocks. The library has cross browser support and also can run on the server using Node.js.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana