otf-kit vs gluestack-ui — universal RN + web component libraries

TL;DR

gluestack-ui is the most direct head-to-head with otf-kit on the universal RN+web axis. It's built by the team behind NativeBase, ships ~30 components, and uses a copy-paste styling model similar to shadcn/ui's. Strong DX, active community.

The differences come down to engine choice (otf-kit uses Tamagui — true compile-time extraction; gluestack uses its own utility classes), component coverage (otf-kit ships ~3× more), and product shape (otf-kit pairs with paid full-stack kits; gluestack is components-only).

Feature matrix

When gluestack-ui wins

• You want copy-paste source ownership for every component — same ethos as shadcn/ui, just universal.
• You're already using NativeBase and migrating; gluestack is the official successor.
• You prefer NativeWind-driven styling over Tamagui's styled() API — they're both valid, but the syntax is different.
• You don't need broad component coverage — 30 components is enough.

When otf-kit wins

• You need broader component coverage — 198 web / 80 native vs gluestack's ~30.
• You want 17 designed themes (Linear, Glass, Midnight, Minimal, etc.) — picker-driven, runtime-swappable.
• You want proper npm distribution so you can bun update your design system in one command instead of re-running a CLI per component.
• You want a full-stack starting point — our paid kits include Hono + Drizzle + Better Auth + Stripe + demo data.

Code comparison — Button

// gluestack-ui (after CLI copy)
import { Button, ButtonText } from '@/components/ui/button'

<Button size="md" variant="solid">
  <ButtonText>Click me</ButtonText>
</Button>

// otf-kit
import { Button } from '@otfdashkit/ui-native'

<Button variant="default" size="md">Click me</Button>

What's identical

Both libraries solve the same hard problem: parity component API across web and React Native. Both ship strict TypeScript. Both lean on a token system. Both are MIT-licensed.

If you've shipped with gluestack-ui, the otf-kit native API will feel familiar within an afternoon.

Migrating from gluestack-ui to otf-kit

Most components map 1:1. The biggest mental shift:

• Styling: gluestack uses NativeWind class strings; otf-kit uses Tamagui's prop-based or className-based API on native, Tailwind on web.
• Compound components: gluestack splits components into <Button> + <ButtonText> + <ButtonIcon>; otf-kit defaults to a single <Button> with text and icon slots.
• Themes: gluestack tokens → otf-kit tokens via the Design Token Migrator →.

FAQ

Is otf-kit faster than gluestack-ui at runtime? Both libraries do compile-time work to flatten styles, so runtime cost is comparable. Tamagui's static extraction is more aggressive on native; the win on bundle size is small but real.

Can I use gluestack and otf-kit in the same app? Technically yes, but they fight over theme tokens and styling. Pick one per app.

Which has better DataTable? otf-kit's SaaS Dashboard kit ships a TanStack Table-based <DataTable>. gluestack-ui doesn't ship a table primitive — you compose your own.

Try otf-kit

• Free SDK on npm →
• Live component preview →
• Compare otf-kit vs Tamagui →
• Compare otf-kit vs NativeWind →