# Tiptap vs CKEditor 5: build the editor, or buy the finished one

*Source: https://www.editorstack.cc/compare/tiptap-vs-ckeditor — last updated 2026-09-17. Licensed CC BY 4.0 with attribution to EditorStack.*

## Summary

- Tiptap gives you an MIT-licensed editing engine and no interface; CKEditor 5 gives you a finished editor with a toolbar, under GPL-2.0-or-later for self-hosting or commercial terms.
- Measured: @tiptap/react 3.31.3 with StarterKit at 123.3 kB gzip, ckeditor5 48.5.1 with ClassicEditor and four plugins at 161.2 kB. Our benchmark applications needed 11 and 9 lines, but only CKEditor's has a toolbar.
- The licence usually decides it before the features do: a closed-source product pays for CKEditor 5 from day one, and pays for Tiptap only if it wants Tiptap's hosted services.

## At a glance

| Product | Type | Licence | Frameworks | Bundle (min+gzip) | Price from | Self-hosted | White label | Score |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| [Tiptap](https://www.editorstack.cc/libraries/tiptap) | library | MIT | Any (framework-agnostic) | 123.3 kB gzip | Free tier, paid plans undisclosed | Yes | Yes | 8.3 |
| [CKEditor 5](https://www.editorstack.cc/libraries/ckeditor) | library | GPL-2.0-or-later OR commercial | Any (framework-agnostic) | 161.2 kB gzip | from $144/mo | Yes | Unverified | not scored |

## What each one hands you

**[Tiptap](/libraries/tiptap)** hands you ProseMirror's document model behind an extension API, and
stops. Our benchmark application renders an editable heading and paragraph with no controls at all,
because the controls are meant to be your components.

**[CKEditor 5](/libraries/ckeditor)** hands you an editor. Our nine-line application renders a toolbar
with undo, redo, a heading dropdown and bold and italic buttons, because those plugins supply their
own interface.

Neither is better in the abstract. The question is whether the editor's interface is part of your
product design or a commodity your users should not notice.

## Where Tiptap wins

**MIT licence.** No GPL obligations, no licence key, no vendor branding. For a closed-source product
this alone often settles it.

**Your interface, exactly.** Every control is your component, so the editor matches your design
system without overriding a vendor's styles.

**Lighter, before UI.** 123.3 kB gzip against 161.2 kB. Your toolbar adds to Tiptap's figure; CKEditor's
already includes one.

**A first-party Vue binding from the same core**, just as CKEditor has — but without the licence
question attached.

## Where CKEditor 5 wins

**A finished editor.** Toolbar, dropdowns and keyboard behaviour exist on install. Weeks of interface
work you do not do.

**Angular.** CKEditor publishes a first-party Angular integration; Tiptap's Angular support is
community-maintained.

**Localisation breadth.** 41 fully translated UI languages documented by the vendor, for an interface
you did not have to translate yourself.

**One vendor for collaboration and AI.** Both are premium features — as Tiptap's collaboration and AI
are paid services — but they arrive integrated into the same editor.

## The licence conversation

Have it first. A product that cannot comply with GPL-2.0-or-later is choosing between Tiptap, free, and
CKEditor 5 under a commercial licence priced around editor loads — vendor-published Essential at
$160 per month, or $144 on annual billing. That is a real budget line, and it should be compared with
the engineering time to build Tiptap's interface, not with zero.

## Migration between them

Both render HTML, so stored content moves reasonably: export HTML from one, import it into the other,
and handle the elements one schema allows and the other drops. Custom Tiptap extensions become
CKEditor plugins and vice versa, which is a rewrite of that code rather than a port.

The two triggers to watch for are predictable: a licence review points from CKEditor 5 towards
Tiptap, and interface work that outgrows its budget points from Tiptap towards CKEditor 5.

## Decision checklist

1. **Can we accept GPL obligations?** If not, price CKEditor's commercial licence against building UI.
2. **Is the editor interface part of our design system?** Yes favours Tiptap.
3. **Do we need Angular?** CKEditor has a first-party answer.
4. **Who builds the toolbar, and when?** With Tiptap, you do, before launch.
5. **Do we need collaboration?** Both sell it; neither gives it away.

## The number that matters

37.9 kB — the gzip gap between the two in our [bundle benchmark](/research/bundle-size-benchmark-2026),
for a CKEditor configuration that includes a toolbar where Tiptap's includes no interface at all. The rest of the category is on the
[rich-text editor comparison](/categories/rich-text).


## Frequently asked questions

### Which is free for a closed-source SaaS product?

Tiptap's editor framework and open-source extensions, under MIT. CKEditor 5 is free only under the GPL, whose obligations most closed-source products cannot accept, so they need a commercial licence.

### Which is lighter?

Tiptap, at 123.3 kB gzip with StarterKit against CKEditor 5's 161.2 kB for ClassicEditor with Essentials, Paragraph, Bold and Italic. The CKEditor figure includes a toolbar; the Tiptap figure does not include any interface.

### Which is faster to ship?

CKEditor 5, if its interface is acceptable to your designers, because the toolbar and dropdowns already exist. Tiptap is faster to a working engine and slower to a finished product.