LoopBack vs Moleculer

Overview

LoopBack

Stacks285

Followers556

Votes33

GitHub Stars13.2K

Forks1.2K

Moleculer

Stacks59

Followers88

Votes14

GitHub Stars6.3K

Forks597

LoopBack vs Moleculer: What are the differences?

Introduction:

LoopBack and Moleculer are both popular frameworks used for building microservices. However, there are key differences between the two that developers should consider when choosing a framework for their projects.

Architecture: LoopBack is a Node.js framework specifically designed for creating APIs and connecting to data sources, providing a high level of abstraction to speed up development. On the other hand, Moleculer is a microservices framework that offers a decentralized and distributed architecture, allowing developers to build scalable and fault-tolerant applications.
Service Communication: In LoopBack, services typically communicate through HTTP or other transport protocols, while in Moleculer, services communicate using a built-in transport abstraction layer that supports various communication patterns such as requests, events, and broadcasts. This allows for more flexibility and control over how services interact with each other.
ORM and Database Integration: LoopBack comes with built-in ORM (Object-Relational Mapping) support, making it easier to work with databases and data models. On the other hand, Moleculer does not provide out-of-the-box ORM support, but allows developers to integrate with existing ORM libraries or database systems as needed.
Service Discovery and Load Balancing: Moleculer includes built-in support for service discovery and load balancing, making it easier to scale applications and manage the distribution of requests across multiple instances of services. In contrast, LoopBack does not provide these features by default, requiring developers to implement their own solutions for service discovery and load balancing.
Community and Ecosystem: LoopBack has a large and active community, with plenty of resources, documentation, and plugins available to help developers build and deploy applications quickly. Moleculer also has a growing community, but it may not have as extensive an ecosystem as LoopBack, making it potentially more challenging to find relevant resources and support for specific use cases.
Learning Curve: While LoopBack is known for its simplicity and ease of use, Moleculer has a steeper learning curve due to its sophisticated architecture and advanced features. Developers with experience in building microservices or distributed systems may find Moleculer more powerful and flexible, but beginners or those looking for a simpler framework may prefer LoopBack.

In Summary, LoopBack and Moleculer differ in their architecture, service communication methods, ORM/database integration, service discovery/load balancing capabilities, community/ecosystem support, and learning curve, making each framework suitable for different types of projects and developers.

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)

Manual

Detailed Comparison

LoopBack	Moleculer
A highly-extensible, open-source Node.js framework that enables you to create dynamic end-to-end REST APIs with little or no coding. Connect to multiple data sources, write business logic in Node.js, glue on top of your existing services and data, connect using JS, iOS & Android SDKs.	It is a fault tolerant framework. It has built-in load balancer, circuit breaker, retries, timeout and bulkhead features. It is open source and free of charge project.
A brand new core; OpenAPI spec driven REST API; GraphQL support	Blazing fast; Extensible; Open source; Fault tolerance
Statistics
GitHub Stars 13.2K	GitHub Stars 6.3K
GitHub Forks 1.2K	GitHub Forks 597
Stacks 285	Stacks 59
Followers 556	Followers 88
Votes 33	Votes 14
Pros & Cons
Pros 11 Need a nodejs ReST-API, DB, AAA, Swagger? Then loopback 9 Easy Database Migration 6 Code generator 4 The future of API's 2 GraphQL Cons 7 Community is slow 1 Backward compatibility	Pros 3 Complete microservices ecosystem without lerning curve 3 Many integrations out of the box (db,messaging,tracing) 3 Typescript 2 High performance 2 Node.js
Integrations
Node.js TypeScript ExpressJS StrongLoop GraphQL	MongoDB PostgreSQL Node.js MSSQL MySQL SQLite

What are some alternatives to LoopBack, Moleculer?

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

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

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

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 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 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 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 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.

TypeORM

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.

Related Comparisons

LoopBack vs Moleculer: What are the differences?

Introduction:

Architecture: LoopBack is a Node.js framework specifically designed for creating APIs and connecting to data sources, providing a high level of abstraction to speed up development. On the other hand, Moleculer is a microservices framework that offers a decentralized and distributed architecture, allowing developers to build scalable and fault-tolerant applications.
Service Communication: In LoopBack, services typically communicate through HTTP or other transport protocols, while in Moleculer, services communicate using a built-in transport abstraction layer that supports various communication patterns such as requests, events, and broadcasts. This allows for more flexibility and control over how services interact with each other.
ORM and Database Integration: LoopBack comes with built-in ORM (Object-Relational Mapping) support, making it easier to work with databases and data models. On the other hand, Moleculer does not provide out-of-the-box ORM support, but allows developers to integrate with existing ORM libraries or database systems as needed.
Service Discovery and Load Balancing: Moleculer includes built-in support for service discovery and load balancing, making it easier to scale applications and manage the distribution of requests across multiple instances of services. In contrast, LoopBack does not provide these features by default, requiring developers to implement their own solutions for service discovery and load balancing.
Community and Ecosystem: LoopBack has a large and active community, with plenty of resources, documentation, and plugins available to help developers build and deploy applications quickly. Moleculer also has a growing community, but it may not have as extensive an ecosystem as LoopBack, making it potentially more challenging to find relevant resources and support for specific use cases.
Learning Curve: While LoopBack is known for its simplicity and ease of use, Moleculer has a steeper learning curve due to its sophisticated architecture and advanced features. Developers with experience in building microservices or distributed systems may find Moleculer more powerful and flexible, but beginners or those looking for a simpler framework may prefer LoopBack.

LoopBack vs Moleculer

Overview