Selecting a React Component Library, the Strategic Way

For engineering teams choosing a new UI component library, it’s easy to over-index on visuals and ease of use.

It’s only when a library choice begins to create tech debt and extensibility headwinds a few months down the line that teams begin to recognise the enormous challenge of selecting a library that can truly carry their codebase for the long-haul.

‍

It’s a natural temptation to prioritize flashy features or quick wins, but selecting a library means balancing fast implementation and long-term viability against purely visual concerns.

Does it really matter which component library you choose?

Absolutely.
‍
Early in your career, picking a UI component library seems like a simple choice: what looks good and is easy to use?

But having been around the block a few times, you know you need to look further down the road and consider how the component library you choose today might impact your org in the next 24 to 48 months.

‍

Most engineering orgs choose to adopt a UI component library because they’re facing some of the following challenges:

• Your engineers are writing the same code over and over again: It’s not uncommon to have similar components across your project with only minor differences - all of which need to be updated when the latest design refresh lands.
  
• Your custom React components are becoming difficult to manage: These often start out feeling lightweight, but quickly becomes a heavy anchor as designs are quickly iterated on, new engineers are onboarded to the codebase and new feature requests rapidly expand the size of your codebase.
  
• Cross-browser compatibility is giving you a headache: As your internal library of custom components grows, so too does the time and effort in testing iterations against multiple browsers. Code deployments become slower and more cumbersome to test.

What should you look for in a component library?

Consider using a headless library

It’s rare for a UI library to have every component you might need as your app grows. You’re always going to want a custom component eventually – or at least need to facelift an existing component.

‍

With that in mind, you’ll want to choose an open source library or, if choosing a closed source library, ensure it has a license that allows you to build on top of it.

‍
Consider a headless library like Radix UI – they make customization straightforward since they don't impose design constraints.

Headless libraries are modular too, meaning you can mix and match components as needed. Say you’re using Radix for the bulk of your UI but need a color picker — no problem, just bring in React Aria to fill that gap.

Choose a lindy library

Consider the lindy effect - the longer a library of components has been around, the more likely it is to stick around in future. Just make sure they’re not relics — regular updates are non-negotiable.

‍
Longevity also tends to translate into a bigger ecosystem. The longer a library has been around, the more likely it is that there are extensive blog and stack overflow posts about it– or at least, sufficient AI training data to ensure an LLM can solve your obscure implementation bugs.

‍
As part of your longevity assessment on a library, you’ll also want to consider who the core maintainers are. If your choice of library is maintained primarily by a startup that could go out of business at any time, you’ll want to know that upfront.

‍
For a little extra certainty, check how dedicated the maintainers are. If it’s an open source project, are any of the core maintainers full-time? For closed source libraries, does the maintaining org have a dedicated team working on this, or is it a side-project for their engineers?

Does it integrate easily with your tech stack?

If your app uses SSR (like with Next.js), don’t assume your choice UI library is built with that in mind. Libraries using CSS-in-JS, like Emotion or Styled Components, might need specific SSR configurations to avoid issues like hydration mismatches or slower load times.

‍

And if you’re using TypeScript, it’s worth sticking to libraries with solid, official TypeScript support. Libraries with partial or community-maintained TypeScript definitions can be risky — they can lead to bugs or extra maintenance headaches down the line.

Always keep an eye on the door

Tightly integrated libraries can lead to vendor lock-in and complex migrations. Modular or headless options like Radix UI don’t just help with extensibility — they make it easier to migrate away entirely when the need arises.

If you can’t use a headless library, build thin wrapper components to isolate dependencies and simplify future transitions.

Don’t forget about performance

Your choice of component library should not negatively impact your app’s performance; it should be lightweight enough not to bloat your application unnecessarily.

‍
Before choosing a library, double-check its bundle size. On a smaller library or one where you only want a handful of the components, you could also save on performance by copying the parts you need into a folder and writing your own unit tests instead of including the full package.

‍
Alternatively, opt for a library that supports tree-shaking to import only what you use.

Word to the wise: be wary of libraries relying heavily on runtime CSS-in-JS — these can bog down load times for larger apps unless optimized with server-side rendering (SSR).

Keep your (testing and accessibility) standards high

Look for a library that integrates well with tools like React Testing Library or Jest. They make it much easier to write unit or e2e tests – which means your team will actually do it.

‍
Additionally, if accessibility is a priority (and it should be), choose a library that supports proper ARIA roles, keyboard navigation, and focus management by default so you’re not caught playing catch-up later on. 

‍

Keep in mind that many libraries will only provide basic accessibility support but may fall short on complex interactions (like nested dropdowns, tooltips, or modals). If you’re building apps with intricate UIs, make sure the library you choose is fully ARIA-compliant – otherwise, your team will have to retrofit it later which will be a huge time sink.

‍
Thankfully, libraries like Chakra UI and Radix UI come with accessibility baked in.

Our top 5 React libraries

#1 - Radix UI

Radix UI is a headless component library that provides low-level UI primitives designed for building highly customizable and accessible web apps. 

‍

How popular is it? Radix has around 15k GitHub stars and 15.5k weekly npm downloads.

‍

Why does it stand out? Unlike the other UI libraries we’ve discussed, it’s "headless," meaning it provides the functional logic of components without applying any styling. 

‍

How extensible is it? Arguably the most extensible library on this list, Radix UI provides low-level primitives (e.g., dialogs, popovers, tooltips) that you can integrate and style as needed.

‍

Why would you choose it? Pick Radix UI if you’re looking for behavior-only components and want granular-level control over the design.

‍

The catch, though, is that you’ll need to put in the time to style everything from scratch, so Radix does require a significant upfront investment.

‍
And if you don’t have a dedicated team to create your design system, you might lose some consistency along the way. In that case, shadcn/ui could be a better starting point — it combines Radix with Tailwind, so you get the logic and accessibility benefits of Radix UI plus a foundation for your design system.

#2 - Chakra UI

Chakra UI is a modular and accessible React component library that’s simple to use and highly customizable. It’s more lightweight than MUI but has fewer components and a smaller community.

‍

How popular is it? Chakra has 37.8k GitHub stars and gets 590k weekly downloads on NPM.

‍

Why does it stand out? Chakra UI stands out because it’s designed for simplicity and flexibility while being highly accessible out of the box. Unlike MUI, which has a more opinionated, Material Design look, Chakra’s styling is not as limiting and is easier to customize. It’s also less bulky than a library like AntD.

‍

How extensible is it? Chakra UI is fully customizable using variables. It also integrates with Framer Motion, Formik, Capsize, Storybook, and React Table to extend the library’s usage.

‍

Why would you choose it? Chakra makes it quick to get a consistent UI going, especially if you don’t want to stress about customizing right away.  

‍

That said, Chakra is missing a few key components that you’d find in other libraries like MUI, such as a date picker and autocomplete. However, with its open component design (at least in v3), you can easily add your own.

‍
One thing to keep in mind, though, is that it uses Emotion (and runtime CSS-in-JS) for styling. As we said earlier, this can slow things down significantly. If performance is a priority, consider looking elsewhere.

‍
Chakra is also a great alternative to our next React library, MUI, if you don’t like the “Google-y” aesthetic.

#3 - MUI

MUI is a well-known React library based on Google’s Material Design principles.

How popular is it? It has over 93.8k GitHub stars and boasts 4.2 million weekly downloads on NPM.

‍

Why does it stand out?  MUI has one of the most complete sets of components out of the box, covering everything from basic elements like buttons and forms to advanced, highly customizable tables, grids, and date/time pickers  — features that are often limited or missing in other libraries. 

It’s also been around longer, so the community is large and well-established, which means plenty of support and resources that can be harder to find with newer libraries.

‍

How extensible is it? MUI offers a powerful built-in theming system that allows developers to customize components globally or at the component level.

‍

Why would you choose it? MUI is practical when you need to get a team up to speed quickly without a huge learning curve.

Its documentation is thorough and the community is large — so you’re not forced to spend hours hunting down answers. Its opinionated design means you get a cohesive look and feel out of the box, which saves a ton of time on styling decisions. Plus, you won’t have to worry about team members creating arbitrary code standards, as MUI’s are quite opinionated.

That does leave a key flaw, though - if you’re not a big fan of the material design feel, you’re better off choosing an entirely different library.

#4 - Shadcn UI

Shadcn UI is a newer library, rapidly gaining popularity for its combination of Radix UI and Tailwind CSS.

‍

How popular is it? Shadcn UI stands at 74k Github stars and sees over 88k weekly downloads on NPM.

‍

Why does it stand out? Shadcn UI builds on Radix by integrating Tailwind CSS directly into its components. Radix’s unstyled components are highly customizable but require significant initial styling work. By combining the two, Shadcn offers all the benefits of Radix, without that initial upfront investment in getting the components set up.

‍

How extensible is it? A close second to vanilla Radix, you can copy Shadcn’s component code directly into your project rather than installing a package dependency. This means that you have complete control over the code, allowing you to modify each component until your heart’s content.

‍

Why would you choose it? If you like the flexibility of Radix, but don’t want to style each Radix primitive from scratch, you’ll like Shadcn.

It’s also kind to your server on the performance front, saving weight with its approach of only using the components you need. That same functionality allows you to copy and paste components directly from the docs, meaning you can get up and running in seconds. 

#5 - Blueprint UI

‍BluePrint UI from Palantir,  is a React UI library that offers over 40 UI components such as buttons, forms, tables, and more, all styled consistently for web and desktop apps.

‍

How popular is it? It boasts over 20.7k GitHub stars and over 251k weekly NPM downloads.

‍

What makes it stand out? Unlike more general-purpose libraries in this list, Blueprint includes specialized components such as tables with extensive data handling features, tree views, and time zone pickers — elements that are invaluable for data-heavy apps. 

‍

How extensible is it? Blueprint’s design is modular, meaning you can use only the components you need without pulling in unnecessary code, which makes it easier to integrate with other libraries or custom-built components.  The library’s components also have a range of modifiers (e.g. intent, large, and minimal) to adjust their appearance. 

‍

Why would you choose it? If you’re building apps that require intricate data visualization and management, BluePrint is a great choice. For any other use-case, we recommend looking at other libraries on this list.

Next steps

Whatever library you choose, make sure it’s with an eye to the distant future - How much customization will your team need? What’s the expected lifetime of the app the library supports? Will the library retain its flexibility and developer experience as your engineering org scales?

‍

If you’re looking to offload component management altogether and leverage a library of pre-built units, low-code platforms like Superblocks could be a great option. 

‍

With Superblocks, you get a drag-and-drop app canvas that's fully visual and extensible with React - so it can be picked up by developers with minimal front-end experience, or leveraged as a managed component library by more experienced frontend developers who want to add their own components or customize themes.

‍

This approach allows for faster iterations of your front-ends thanks to an integrated staging environment, one-click deployments, and fully managed infrastructure. Try Superblocks for free