Motion vs. GSAP: A Practical Comparison for React Animations

In the web animation world, Motion and GSAP are widely discussed and debated tools. I’ve used both throughout my career, but only began exploring their deeper capabilities within the last three months as I transition into creative development and design engineering. Both libraries offer powerful solutions for animating interfaces, each with unique philosophies. In this article, I’ll compare them specifically in the context of React and share which situations each tool handles best.

Imperative vs. Declarative Approaches

One notable strength of Motion, though not necessarily a weakness of GSAP, is its React-friendly, declarative approach to animation. Motion elements allow you to animate components directly in JSX through props such as initial and animate. This can simplify workflows that would otherwise require writing custom keyframes.

GSAP, in contrast, leans on selectors, tweens, and timelines to animate elements imperatively. While powerful, it feels slightly less integrated with React’s mindset. For easily handling individual component animations, Motion takes the win here.

Hook Friendliness in React

React revolves heavily around hooks, and both libraries embrace this. GSAP offers a single useGSAP hook that centralizes all animation logic. Motion, on the other hand, provides multiple hooks for sequencing, controlling values, and more.

Personally, I find GSAP’s single-entry approach simpler and more intuitive. It handles complex transitions and offers plugins for almost any effect you might imagine. While Motion’s approach is flexible, GSAP’s consolidated hook experience feels more streamlined. For this category, GSAP comes out ahead.

Sequencing Animations

By “sequencing,” I mean creating animations that run one after another. Motion’s approach historically resembled promises: you write animations using the animate() method and await them sequentially. This is straightforward and readable.

GSAP, however, uses timelines to group and order tweens (to, from, fromTo). This makes the relationship between animations feel intentional and interconnected. Timelines are a core part of why GSAP feels so elegant for chained sequences. In this area, I prefer GSAP’s design.

Additional Considerations

There are still many areas worth comparing, such as easing systems, scroll-based animations, morphing tools, plugin ecosystems, etc. Both libraries excel in different ways. In many cases, they can even be used together; GSAP for complex sequences, Motion for simple component-level interactions.

Conclusion

Motion and GSAP can achieve almost anything you’d reasonably want in modern UI animation. That said, highly advanced experiences like the Lando Norris website often require WebGL or 3D rendering engines alongside these tools. Ultimately, both libraries offer different paths toward similar goals. Your choice depends on the complexity of your project and the style of animation you want to build.