HonestUI vs shadcn/ui

Use shadcn/ui if you want its large ecosystem, registry support, blocks, multiple component bases, and tooling around the library.

Use HonestUI if you want editable React components with a more opinionated visual direction, plus charts, icons, logos, vectors, and shaders from the same project.

Both libraries give you the source code for UI components. You add a component to your project, then you can open the file and change it like any other code. (HonestUI overview, shadcn/ui introduction)

The biggest difference is what surrounds those components. shadcn/ui has the larger ecosystem. HonestUI includes more first-party visual collections outside of standard UI.

If shadcn/ui already works well for your project, there is no reason to switch just to switch. The better question is which approach gives you more of what your project actually needs.

HonestUI fits better when you want more than standard application components from one project.

Along with buttons, dialogs, fields, selects, tables, and other UI components, HonestUI includes animated components and package collections for charts, icons, logos, vectors, and shaders.

Charts are one of the clearer differences. HonestUI uses Apache ECharts and exposes the collection through honestui/charts. If you already use ECharts or want its broader visualization capabilities, this may fit your project better.

HonestUI also has its own visual system built around semantic tokens for color, spacing, typography, radius, and effects. You still own the component files, but the defaults give the library a more consistent starting point.

shadcn/ui fits better when ecosystem size and flexibility matter most.

It has a large registry system and can install components from the official registry, public third-party registries, private registries, and namespaced sources.

You also have more choice in the underlying component primitives. Base UI is the default for new projects, while Radix UI and React Aria are also supported. (Base UI default, React Aria support)

If your team already uses shadcn/ui heavily, has custom components based on it, or depends on its registry ecosystem, staying with it will usually make more sense.

The basic workflow is similar.

With HonestUI:

npx honestui@latest init
npx honestui@latest add button

Then import the component from your project:

import { Button } from "@/components/ui/button"

export function Example() {
  return <Button>Continue</Button>
}

With shadcn/ui:

npx shadcn@latest init
npx shadcn@latest add button

The component also lives in your project:

import { Button } from "@/components/ui/button"

export function Example() {
  return <Button>Continue</Button>
}

This is an important similarity. Source ownership is not a reason to choose HonestUI over shadcn/ui. Both give you editable component files.

HonestUI installs its chart collection through the package:

npm install honestui

import { BarChart } from "honestui/charts"
import "honestui/charts.css"

shadcn/ui adds its chart integration to your source:

npx shadcn@latest add chart

Then you compose it with Recharts:

import { Bar, BarChart } from "recharts"
import { ChartContainer } from "@/components/ui/chart"

The shadcn/ui chart documentation uses Recharts, while HonestUI uses Apache ECharts.

Neither approach is automatically better. If you already prefer one charting engine, that may be the easiest way to decide.

Move one component at a time instead of replacing everything at once.

1. Commit your current component and its call sites.
2. Check the configured component paths in components.json.
3. Add the replacement without overwriting the existing component.
4. Compare props, dependencies, theme values, keyboard behavior, and local variants.
5. Update the affected parts of the application.
6. Test the component before removing the old version.

The two libraries share a similar source-first model, but their component APIs and styling systems are not drop-in replacements.

Does shadcn/ui also let me own the component code?

Yes. Both shadcn/ui and HonestUI add editable component source to your project.

Is HonestUI a replacement for shadcn/ui?

It can be, but it does not need to be.

HonestUI makes more sense when you specifically want its components, visual direction, ECharts-based charts, animated components, or additional visual collections.

Which library is better for charts?

HonestUI uses Apache ECharts. shadcn/ui uses Recharts.

Choose based on which chart engine and API fit your project better.

Which one has the bigger ecosystem?

shadcn/ui has the larger ecosystem, especially around third-party registries, blocks, presets, and tooling.

Can I use both?

Yes. Just make sure they are not trying to write to the same component files and keep your styling and token choices consistent.

Choose shadcn/ui if you want the larger ecosystem, more registry options, blocks, multiple primitive choices, or you already have a project built around it.

Choose HonestUI if you want editable UI components with a consistent visual direction and also want charts, animated components, icons, logos, vectors, and shaders from the same project.

If you want to see how HonestUI approaches it, explore the components.

Connor Love, the creator of HonestUI, wrote this comparison. It is not an independent review.