Abaabil vs React Aria Components
Both libraries, measured the same way on the same day: each entry point bundled with its own module graph, gzipped, React treated as external. All twenty-three abaabil components together come to 7,364 B. The same set from React Aria Components, over the 19 it offers, comes to 89,201 B, or 12x the size.
What React Aria Components is
Adobe's behaviour layer, the research arm of accessible React components. Unstyled, like Radix, but with markedly deeper internationalisation and pointer handling.
Per component, gzipped
abaabil's column is its a11y tier, the one most applications should use. 19 components are directly comparable; the widest gap is select at 108x. React Aria Components has no equivalent for 4 of the twenty-three (pagination, alert, avatar, badge), so those are left out rather than counted as a win.
| Component | abaabil | React Aria Components | ratio |
|---|---|---|---|
| button | 557 | 13,155 | 24x |
| dialog | 580 | 18,635 | 32x |
| popover | 495 | 30,143 | 61x |
| menu | 1,120 | 50,254 | 45x |
| tooltip | 459 | 19,532 | 43x |
| combobox | 1,097 | 60,354 | 55x |
| input | 501 | 11,482 | 23x |
| textarea | 506 | 11,479 | 23x |
| file | 500 | 13,657 | 27x |
| checkbox | 534 | 14,995 | 28x |
| radio | 444 | 17,884 | 40x |
| switch | 423 | 14,542 | 34x |
| select | 530 | 57,292 | 108x |
| slider | 705 | 14,846 | 21x |
| accordion | 364 | 14,408 | 40x |
| tabs | 786 | 30,915 | 39x |
| toolbar | 784 | 16,098 | 21x |
| breadcrumb | 335 | 20,066 | 60x |
| progress | 493 | 5,109 | 10x |
| all of them, one bundle | 7,364 | 89,201 | 12x |
The last row matters more than any single one above it. A library with a large shared runtime pays for it once, so the gap always narrows as you use more of it. Quoting only the widest row would be the easiest way to mislead you with real numbers.
abaabil's figures are JavaScript only, the same as every other column here, and unlike React Aria Components it arrives already styled. That cost is real and tracked separately rather than folded in: the whole stylesheet is 5,217 B gzipped if you import all of it. The method, and every library at once, is on the Why page.
When to choose React Aria Components instead
Accessibility or internationalisation is the requirement rather than a checkbox. React Aria handles locale-aware dates and numbers, complex collections, drag and drop, and input modalities that abaabil simply does not address. If you are shipping to a brief that names WCAG and a dozen locales, this is the most complete answer in React.
abaabil is twenty-three components and stops there. It has no date picker, no data grid, no virtualised list, and no plans for any of them. If the thing you need is on that list, the size comparison above is irrelevant to your decision, and you should take the library that has it.
If abaabil is the right fit
Setup is four steps and the first one is npm i abaabil. Every component has its own page with a live example at the tier you would actually import. Or read when not to use it first, which is the section written to talk you out of it.