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. Enzyme vs Mocha

Enzyme vs Mocha

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Mocha
Mocha
Stacks10.8K
Followers3.0K
Votes430
Enzyme
Enzyme
Stacks1.7K
Followers349
Votes0

Enzyme vs Mocha: What are the differences?

Enzyme vs Mocha: Key Differences

Enzyme and Mocha are both commonly used testing tools in the JavaScript ecosystem, but they serve different purposes and have distinct features.

  1. Test Level: Enzyme is primarily used for component testing in React applications, whereas Mocha is a more general-purpose testing framework for JavaScript applications as a whole. Enzyme focuses on testing the individual units of the UI, while Mocha allows testing of various aspects of an application such as backend, frontend, or even API calls.

  2. API and Syntax: Enzyme provides a rich API specifically designed for React components, offering methods like shallow, mount, and render to render React components for testing and asserting their behavior. In contrast, Mocha provides a more flexible syntax with a simple test function signature, allowing users to structure their tests using describe and it blocks.

  3. Testing Style: Enzyme emphasizes a behavior-driven development (BDD) approach, providing utilities to perform assertions on the rendered components, simulate events, and inspect the component's state. Mocha, on the other hand, supports various testing styles including BDD, TDD (Test-Driven Development), and even simple assert-based testing.

  4. Addons and Utilities: Enzyme offers additional utilities like jest-enzyme for integrating with Jest, enzyme-to-json for snapshot testing, and sinon for mocking and stubbing. Mocha, being a more general-purpose framework, encourages the use of external libraries for specific functionalities or testing tools like chai for assertions, sinon for mocking, or istanbul for code coverage.

  5. Async Testing: Enzyme provides utilities for handling asynchronous behavior, such as waiting for promises to resolve or for component updates. It has built-in support for async/await syntax and handles component lifecycle methods gracefully. Mocha, although it has basic support for asynchronous testing using callbacks or promises, may require additional plugins or libraries like mocha-async or chai-as-promised for more advanced scenarios.

  6. DOM Interaction: Enzyme leverages JSDOM, a pure JavaScript implementation of the DOM, allowing headless rendering and manipulation of components. It provides methods like find and simulate for interacting with the virtual DOM. Mocha, being a testing framework, does not have built-in support for DOM interaction or rendering, and users often rely on external libraries like jsdom or browser automation tools.

In summary, Enzyme is a specific and powerful testing utility tailored for React components, providing a BDD-style API and additional React-specific features. Mocha, on the other hand, is a more versatile framework suitable for testing JavaScript applications in general, with flexible syntax, multiple testing styles, and a wide ecosystem of addons and libraries.

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, Enzyme

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
Anonymous
Anonymous

Feb 6, 2020

Needs advice

Postman will be used to do integration testing with the backend API we create. It offers a clean interface to create many requests, and you can even organize these requests into collections. It helps to test the backend API first to make sure it's working before using it in the front-end. Jest can also be used for testing and is already embedded into React. Not only does it offer unit testing support in javascript, it can also do snapshot testing for the front-end to make sure components are rendering correctly. Enzyme is complementary to Jest and offers more functions such as shallow rendering. UnitTest will be used for Python testing as it is simple, has a lot of functionality and already built in with python. Sentry will be used for keeping track of errors as it is also easily integratable with Heroku because they offer it as an add-on. LogDNA will be used for tracking logs which are not errors and is also a Heroku add-on. Its good to have a separate service to record logs, monitor, track and even fix errors in real-time so our application can run more smoothly.

290k views290k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Mocha
Mocha
Enzyme
Enzyme

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.

Enzyme is a JavaScript Testing utility for React that makes it easier to assert, manipulate, and traverse your React Components' output.

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
Shallow rendering; Full DOM rendering; Static rendered markup; React Hooks support
Statistics
Stacks
10.8K
Stacks
1.7K
Followers
3.0K
Followers
349
Votes
430
Votes
0
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
No community feedback yet
Integrations
No integrations available
React
React

What are some alternatives to Mocha, Enzyme?

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.

AVA

AVA

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.

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.

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