Loading article...
Loading article...
Stream/Area:
-
Subject:
-
Paper ID:
JSREM49145
Volume:
|
|
Pages:
Publication Frequency:
Monthly (12 issues per year)
License:International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0) License, allowing free use and distribution with proper attribution.
The selection of an appropriate web framework is crucial for the development of data science applications that are both performant and user-friendly. This study aims to compare three widely-used Python web frameworks—Django, Flask, and FastAPI—based on their performance and usability for data science applications. Django, a full-stack framework, provides an extensive set of built-in features, making it suitable for large-scale projects but potentially slower due to its heavy abstraction. Flask, a lightweight micro-framework, offers flexibility and simplicity, excelling in small to medium-sized projects but requiring additional third-party packages for more advanced functionalities. FastAPI, known for its high performance, leverages asynchronous programming to provide the fastest response times, particularly for APIs and real-time data handling. This comparison evaluates each framework’s strengths and limitations in terms of scalability, ease of use, performance, and suitability for building data-driven applications. The findings suggest that FastAPI is ideal for high-performance, real-time applications, Flask is preferred for simpler and more flexible solutions, and Django is the go-to choice for larger, more feature-complete applications requiring a structured approach.
KEYWORDS
Publication Date
12/4/2025
Peer Review Type
Double-Blind Peer Review
Review Rounds: 2
Documents
Article Views
1
Total views since publication
PDF Downloads
8
Total downloads since publication
Geographic Reach
5
Digital Preservation: This article is permanently archived on Zenodo and complies with all data preservation standards across major indexing platforms.
Plagiarism Screening
This manuscript has been checked for plagiarism using TurnitinPlagiarismChecker software.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest related to this research work.
Funding Information
No funding information available for this research.
Related research in the same subject area
Loading similar articles...