Imagine a world where desktop apps feel as light as a breeze yet pack the power of a thunderstorm. In 2025 developers face a crossroads—Electron or WebView2? Both promise seamless web content on the desktop but the paths they carve couldn’t be more different. The hum of Chromium runs beneath the surface of each yet the choices made at the foundation ripple through every user experience.
As technology races ahead, subtle architectural details shape performance, memory use, and what’s possible behind the screen. What if the real difference isn’t in the code but in how these platforms share their DNA with the browsers we use every day? This article peels back the layers, offering a fresh look at how Electron and WebView2 are redefining what it means to build for the desktop in a world that never sits still.
Core Approaches to Desktop App Development With Web Technologies
Electron and WebView2 support web-based desktop apps but use distinct methods for integrating web technologies. Their handling of browser engines controls distribution size, update strategy, and compatibility.
Bundling a Browser Engine
Electron bundles its browser engine with every app. Each Electron app ships with a defined version of Chromium and Node.js, packaged as part of the application. This guarantees stable rendering and JavaScript environments. Developers know their code always runs in the same engine and API version. Electron updates depend on the application upgrading its internal binaries, so security and feature updates require a revised app release.
Example:
- Messaging app installations grow larger since they include both the app and browser engine, often exceeding 100 MB per installer.
Leveraging System WebViews
WebView2 uses a system-installed webview component, linking to Microsoft Edge-based runtimes starting from Edge 90. Apps running on Windows 11 can access the built-in WebView2 engine without bundling additional binaries, lowering installer size and disk use.
- Evergreen distribution: Apps share the latest installed WebView2 runtime, updating independently from the app. This keeps security patches current but may lead to version differences between user systems.
- Fixed version distribution: Apps can bundle a specific WebView2 version, ensuring stable app behavior.
Example:
- Small utility apps can be under 10 MB since the system webview supplies core browser functionality.
- A drawing app on multiple machines might behave differently if users have different WebView2 runtime versions installed.
| Approach | Electron | WebView2 |
| Browser Engine Distribution | Bundled with app | Shared (Evergreen) or Bundled |
| Default Distribution Size Impact | Increased | Reduced |
| Engine Update Mechanism | Via app updates | Via runtime updater |
| Rendering Engine Consistency | Guaranteed | System-dependent |
| Windows 11 Integration | Not integrated | Shipped inbox |
Architectural Differences
Electron and WebView2 both use Chromium for web content rendering, but their architectures differ in process management and security design. These differences affect app size, consistency, and how updates are managed.
Application Process Models
Electron creates a separate process tree for each application. Each Electron app runs its own main process, utility processes, and one or more renderer processes. These processes do not share memory or resources with other Electron apps, keeping applications isolated and increasing stability.
WebView2 apps share some processes if they use the same user data folder. Several WebView2 apps running on the same device with a shared user data folder can share non-renderer processes, reducing resource use. Apps with different user data folders don’t share processes. This model enables lighter memory usage in multi-app scenarios but can introduce variance across installations.
Communication and Security
Electron gives developers options for process communication and security. The architecture supports both sandboxed and unsandboxed renderers. Electron lets apps configure security settings based on requirements. Some apps enable full sandboxing for higher security, while others allow more system interaction, increasing flexibility.
WebView2 always runs web content in a sandboxed environment. The sandbox is enforced for all renderer processes. WebView2 apps depend on the Edge browser for this security model, which standardizes protection but reduces configuration options. Both platforms use inter-process communication (IPC) to exchange data between the main and renderer processes, but the sandbox enforcement in WebView2 can impact performance and restrict direct system access.
| Feature | Electron | WebView2 |
| Process Isolation | Always per app | Optional (shared or isolated) |
| Renderer Sandboxing | Configurable (on/off) | Always enabled |
| Uses Chromium | Yes | Yes (via Edge fork) |
| Source Availability | Yes (open source) | No |
| IPC Flexibility | Configurable | Restricted by sandbox |
Performance and Resource Usage
Performance defines user experience in desktop applications. Electron and WebView2 use Chromium for web content rendering, but their performance and resource profiles differ in key ways.
Startup Time and Responsiveness
Electron applications load their own copy of the Chromium engine with every launch. This approach increases startup time, especially for larger apps or devices with limited resources. Users may wait several seconds for an Electron app to become responsive. For example, heavy Electron apps show initial load times of 2–5 seconds on standard desktops.
WebView2 applications use the system-installed Edge engine. Apps built with WebView2 often launch faster because they skip bundling Chromium and benefit from existing Edge processes. On Windows 11, where WebView2 ships by default, startup latency drops to nearly 1 second for most lightweight apps. Shared runtime reduces overall engine overhead, further improving response times for multiple WebView2-based apps running together.
Memory and Bundle Size
Memory consumption and installer size impact user satisfaction and device compatibility.
| Framework | Memory Use per App | Bundle Size | Shared Runtime Benefit |
| Electron | 200–400 MB | 50–200 MB | No |
| WebView2 | 50–150 MB | 5–30 MB | Yes |
Electron requires each application to load its separate engine, leading to higher memory usage. Large Electron apps can consume 400 MB or more, which adds up when users open several apps at once. Bundle size for installers often exceeds 100 MB, since every app includes its own full engine version.
WebView2 shares the Edge engine across applications. As a result, memory usage stays lower, especially when several apps run at the same time. Bundle sizes are smaller (often under 30 MB), since apps do not need to ship Chromium. When the shared runtime exists, WebView2 leverages it to save disk and RAM resources. On systems without a preinstalled WebView2 runtime, apps still grow in size, but distribution remains more efficient compared to Electron.
Cross-Platform Support and Ecosystem Considerations
Electron supports Windows, macOS, and Linux across x64, ARM64, and IA-32. Developers use a single codebase to reach users on all major desktop platforms. Electron’s active community maintains a broad collection of npm modules and integrations, including desktop features like notifications, file system access, and menus. Many open-source packages, for example node-native modules and cross-platform UI libraries, work out-of-the-box with Electron.
WebView2 only supports Windows (Win32, WinForms, WPF, and WinUI). It connects directly to Microsoft’s Edge browser, using a system-installed runtime. Users get updates independently from the app, which lowers maintenance for developers but limits platform reach. WebView2 apps depend on the presence and version of Edge, so features may differ between devices running different Edge versions.
Ecosystem tools differ. Electron integrates Node.js deeply, enabling any Node.js or npm package to enhance app logic and connect to devices. WebView2 relies on the host application’s native language—C#, C++, or others—for system-level tasks. JavaScript running inside WebView2 cannot access desktop APIs directly but communicates through the application host.
Community resources and documentation influence development. Electron offers extensive guides, public API documentation, and active forums, which attract developers building cross-platform apps. WebView2’s ecosystem, focused on Microsoft’s .NET platforms, supports integration into enterprise Windows environments. Examples include WinForms-based business tools and Windows-exclusive utilities.
Developers select frameworks based on platform coverage and required features. Electron provides cross-platform reach and rich web integration. WebView2 gives Windows-focused solutions a smaller footprint and native integration, but it restricts cross-platform expansion. Both options shape the app’s ecosystem and long-term support strategy.
Choosing the Right Solution for 2025
Selecting Electron or WebView2 for desktop apps in 2025 depends on target platforms, distribution requirements, and feature needs. Electron supports Windows, macOS, and Linux, letting a single codebase serve multiple operating systems. WebView2 works with Windows devices and requires the Edge browser for web rendering.
Electron apps contain their own Chromium engine. This ensures consistent behavior and compatibility across different systems. WebView2 apps use the Edge engine installed on the system, which reduces app size and resource use but can lead to different experiences if Edge versions differ.
Developers build Electron apps with JavaScript using Node.js, enabling direct access to system APIs and npm modules. WebView2 works with native languages like C#, C++, or Win32, using JavaScript inside the webview for web tasks. In WebView2, system access needs host process integration, adding extra steps for tasks outside the browser sandbox.
Application distribution differs between the two. Electron packages include all needed binaries, creating larger downloads that don’t depend on system-installed browsers. WebView2 apps remain smaller since they use the shared Edge engine, but they need the Evergreen runtime present on each device.
Security configuration options vary. Electron lets developers adjust sandbox settings. WebView2 applies a strong sandbox for all web content, offering standardized protection but less custom control.
API access affects available features. Electron provides direct access to notifications, file systems, and OS menus with built-in APIs and npm modules. WebView2 centers on web standards and pushes OS-specific features through the host app or Windows APIs.
The choice affects update management. Electron updates the Chromium version with each new release, ensuring the latest web features reach all users. WebView2 updates align with Edge, and apps automatically access new web features when the user’s Edge browser updates, though this can lead to fragmentation if devices run different Edge versions.
Support infrastructure and learning resources differ. Electron offers an extensive ecosystem, with guides and modules maintained by a global community. WebView2 focuses on integration within Microsoft’s platforms and documentation aligns closely with Windows development practices.
| Factor | Electron | WebView2 |
| Platform Support | Windows, macOS, Linux | Windows (with Microsoft Edge) |
| Engine Bundling | App includes Chromium engine | Uses system-installed Edge engine |
| App Size | Larger (bundles engine) | Smaller (shares Edge binaries) |
| API Access | Node.js, npm modules, OS APIs | Web standards, host app APIs |
| Security | Configurable sandbox settings | Standardized sandbox for web content |
| Update Mechanism | Packaged with app updates | Updates with Edge browser |
| Community/Resources | Large, cross-platform guides and modules | Focused on Windows/.NET integration |
These factors support clear choices for teams building desktop software in 2025. If unified cross-platform coverage and access to system APIs are priorities, Electron presents a strong option. If app size, easier system integration, or Windows-first features are essential, WebView2 aligns better with those goals.
Conclusion
Choosing between Electron and WebView2 in 2025 comes down to a project’s unique goals and constraints. Developers need to weigh the importance of cross-platform compatibility against streamlined Windows integration and consider how each framework aligns with their distribution strategies and performance expectations.
As desktop development continues to evolve, staying up to date with advancements in both ecosystems will help teams make informed decisions. Whether prioritizing broad reach or deep Windows integration, understanding the strengths and trade-offs of Electron and WebView2 ensures that applications deliver the best possible user experience.
