Comparison of MonoLisa vs. Fira Code

If you like Fira Code but want italics for comments and keywords, MonoLisa is worth a look as Fira Code doesn't include italic styles. We'll look into further differences between these two fonts in this brief post.

At a glance

Category	MonoLisa Code	Fira Code
Languages (measured)*	593	395
Writing systems	5 (Latin, Cyrillic, Greek, Hebrew, Armenian)	3 (Latin, Cyrillic, Greek)
Italics	Yes	No
Fixed weights	10	6
Variable axes	Weight (wght), grade (GRAD)	Weight (wght)
Style control	15 stylistic sets, 12 character variants	10 stylistic sets, 32 character variants
Coding ligatures	Yes	Yes
Terminal symbols	Yes	Yes
Proportional counterpart	MonoLisa Text (separate purchase or bundle)	Yes, Fira Sans
Price	Paid; limited free trial	Free and open source
Source	monolisa.dev	Fira Code GitHub repository

Reading texture

MonoLisa’s punctuation is more angular and heavier than Fira Code’s in this sample. Look at the commas, brackets, and braces in parseToken: do you prefer them to stand out, or sit more quietly alongside the letters?

Coding ligatures and character variants

Both fonts support coding ligatures. Compare for example !==, <=, and the arrows below as there are differences in the shapes of ligatures. MonoLisa Code exposes liga, dlig, calt, zero, ss01–ss15, and cv01–cv12 while Fira Code exposes calt, zero, ss01–ss10, and cv01–cv32.

Characters that are easy to confuse

Start with the characters you have actually confused in code. The sample puts 0O, 1lI|, and rn m together with ligatures disabled, so you can inspect their individual shapes. In general, these are good characters to consider in a font since it's so important that you are able to tell them apart. A classic example is how similar lowercase l and uppercase I look in Arial, although that's not a coding font.

Italics and style range

MonoLisa Code has 10 named weights in upright and italic styles. Fira Code has 6 fixed weights and its variable file has 5 named upright weights, from Light through Bold. The specimen below shows MonoLisa alone because Fira Code has no italic font to compare. If your editor slants Fira Code for italic syntax, that is a software-generated slant. Try the same comments and keywords in MonoLisa to decide whether designed italic forms are a change you want.

Terminal symbols

Both fonts cover all 6 Powerline symbols, 128 box-drawing characters, and 32 block elements checked in our measurements. Both also have internally aligned vertical metrics. These checks give neither font an advantage as the sample shows how each draws the prompt separators and table borders.

Which font should you choose?

Choose Fira Code if you like how it looks, use upright text, and want a free, open-source font. It already provides ligatures, character variants, and the terminal symbols measured here. You do not need to pay for a replacement just because another font has a longer feature list.

Consider MonoLisa if italic syntax is something you miss, or if you need its additional writing systems. There is also an online tool included for easy customization (essentially a font feature freezer) allowing you to get most out of the font in environments that don't support modern font features otherwise.

Try MonoLisa in your editor

The free trial lets you try MonoLisa on your own screen. It includes Regular and Bold with a limited character set, but omits coding ligatures, OpenType features, and grade adjustment. Use the online tester to explore those features, then use the trial to judge the basic letterforms in your editor so you can see how the font would work out for you.

Fira Code is free and open source. If you decide to buy MonoLisa after trying it, see the checkout for current pricing and applicable taxes.

Measurement notes

* Language counts use Hyperglot 0.8.1, run locally with primary orthographies, living languages, and base-character support. Shaping is disabled. The command was:

.venv-hyperglot/bin/hyperglot --no-shaping --orthography primary --status living --check base <font-file>