Bun vs Deno
Bun versus Deno: JavaScript runtime performance, Node.js compatibility, built-in tooling, ecosystem, and which fits your modern backend stack.
Content-addressable store, strict isolation, mature supply-chain auditing
Rust-core, fast, single-tool install component of the Bun runtime
There's no clear winner; the two tools optimize for different priorities. Pick pnpm if you want to stay runtime-agnostic and enforce policy on every lockfile-changing command. If you're already using Bun as your runtime and the disk/speed gains of the global virtual store matter to you, bun install is compelling. Both block postinstall by default; the difference is where the audit checkpoints sit. Don't mix both in the same repo — one lockfile, one source of truth.
| Category | pnpm | bun install |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | 8/10 | 9/10 |
| Ease of Learning | 7/10 | 8/10 |
| Ecosystem | 9/10 | 6/10 |
| Community | 8/10 | 7/10 |
| Job Market | 7/10 | 6/10 |
| Future-Proof | 8/10 | 8/10 |
// pnpm 12.3 — audited install with allowBuilds and workspace filtering
// package.json (root)
{
"name": "monorepo-root",
"private": true,
"packageManager": "[email protected]"
}
// pnpm-workspace.yaml — allowBuilds arrived in v10.26.0; v11 removed the old names (onlyBuiltDependencies etc.)
packages:
- "apps/*"
- "packages/*"
allowBuilds:
esbuild: true
sharp: true
core-js: false
catalog:
react: ^19.2.3
typescript: ^5.7.0
// CI install step (GitHub Actions)
- name: Install dependencies
run: pnpm install --frozen-lockfile --trust-policy=no-downgrade
// Removing a package revalidates the entire lockfile against active policies
pnpm remove left-pad --filter ./apps/web --trust-lockfile
// Install only changed workspace packages
pnpm install --filter "...[origin/main]"
// Add the store location to the CI cache key
pnpm store path// Bun 1.4 — isolated installs + global virtual store + offline install
// bunfig.toml (root)
[install]
linker = "isolated"
globalStore = true
exact = false
// package.json
{
"name": "monorepo-root",
"private": true,
"workspaces": ["apps/*", "packages/*"],
"trustedDependencies": [
"esbuild",
"sharp",
"@prisma/client"
]
}
// CI install step (GitHub Actions) — locked and offline-compatible
- name: Install dependencies
run: bun install --frozen-lockfile --prefer-offline
// List blocked postinstall scripts
bun pm untrusted
// Mark a package as trusted
bun pm trust sharp
// Install only specific workspace packages
bun install --filter "./apps/web"
// Fully offline install (never touches the network)
bun install --offlineThere's no clear winner; the two tools optimize for different priorities. Pick pnpm if you want to stay runtime-agnostic and enforce policy on every lockfile-changing command. If you're already using Bun as your runtime and the disk/speed gains of the global virtual store matter to you, bun install is compelling. Both block postinstall by default; the difference is where the audit checkpoints sit. Don't mix both in the same repo — one lockfile, one source of truth.
Get Free ConsultationIt depends on the scenario. Bun's published numbers compare its own linkers: on a 1,400-package React/webpack/Babel/jest fixture, a warm install takes 823.9 ms with the hoisted linker versus 124.8 ms with isolated linker + global store (Apple Silicon macOS, hyperfine). pnpm's content-addressable store also relies on reading from disk on warm installs, so both can be fast under the right conditions. You should measure the difference on your own repo size and CI cache strategy — don't carry a single fixture's result over to your own monorepo.