1) Intro + Setup
A Solutions Architect with experience building (and breaking) enterprise systems eventually wants an answer to one simple question:
“Can this thing actually handle load without melting?”
That’s the real litmus test for any platform that claims it can handle complex, data-intensive internal tools.
So instead of doing another “Top 10 Low-Code Platforms of 2025” list, I narrowed it down to the ones that consistently feel fast:
DronaHQ appears later in this article, but there’s a reason it didn’t make the main list (you’ll see).
I’ve also intentionally left out legacy platforms like Appian and Mendix. They serve a purpose, but performance comparisons against modern, developer-first tools would be apples vs office furniture.
Now, let’s actually test them.
Disclaimer: Performance may vary based on your device, browser, and environment. These results reflect tests on a specific setup and should be treated as indicative, not absolute.
2) Test 1: The Raw JS Execution Benchmark (200,000 rows)
The idea was simple:
- Create a JavaScript query on all three platforms.
- Generate 200,000 rows of dummy “product data” (large enough to expose browser bottlenecks).
- Measure how long the platform takes to return the data.
Results
- Retool: ~508 ms
- ToolJet: ~202 ms
- Appsmith: Crashes instantly :-(
ToolJet had the fastest execution by a comfortable margin. Retool’s 500+ ms is not bad for that volume, just not best-in-class. Appsmith, unfortunately, didn’t survive the test at all. It froze before the table even had a chance to render.
If your use case includes dashboards with real-world API calls and moderately large data sets, the difference between 200 ms and 500 ms is not life-changing. But if you’re building complex applications with heavy client-side computation, it does add up.
Appsmith failing at the starting line was… not ideal.
3) Test 2: “Real App” Stress Test (50,000 rows + 10-page application)
Synthetic benchmarks are useful, but they don’t reflect the complexity of real internal tools.
So the next test was a stress test:
- Build a complex app using each platform’s AI builder, then add more components.
- Add a JS query returning 50,000 rows into a table.
- Keep duplicating the initially created page to see how far the platform can take it.
- See what breaks first.
We’re not checking how they handle complexity. We’re checking how they behave when things get absurdly complex. 🙂
Retool
I’ll say this upfront: Retool performs well for complex apps.
The first few pages with the 50k-row table behaved smoothly.
At around 10 pages, each with its own query-trigger confirmation (configured by me), Retool finally froze.
To be fair, this is well beyond what a normal enterprise app should do. No one is building 10 pages filled with 50k rows each. But as I mentioned earlier, we need an answer to:
“Can this thing actually handle load without melting?”
On a side note, something became very clear while trying to push Retool further after the AI-generated base app: having 150+ components in the library is not always an advantage. A large chunk of them are just minor variations of a main component. For example, instead of offering both a container and a collapsible container, you could simply have one container with a collapsible toggle. The result is more noise than choice, and for new users it creates confusion rather than capability.
- Performance: Good.
- Developer experience: Needs a map and a cup of tea.
ToolJet
Next up is ToolJet.
We follow the same process: create an app using ToolJet’s AI builder, add more components, and load it with a table of 50,000 rows of data.
ToolJet stayed as smooth as Retool, and interestingly, it felt like I could push further after the 10 page mark. The rendering pipeline and table handling seem slightly more forgiving under load. You can see the application’s 10th page in the screenshot below.
Again, nobody is building a monster app with 50k-row tables everywhere, so this is academic. But if you are dealing with long, multi-page workflows or heavy dashboards, that extra headroom helps.
- Performance: Slightly better than Retool under extreme conditions.
Appsmith
Let’s check back on Appsmith.
It’s still frozen on the initial screen.
That’s the whole update.
4) Bonus Test: DronaHQ
I wasn’t planning to test DronaHQ. The dated UI didn’t give me much confidence, although I like some parts of the platform. But curiosity won.
I tried the same 200,000-row JS query. It returned 15 rows, clearly truncated. Not to be dramatic, but that seemed like a red flag.
I added a table and tried to preview the full data in a new tab. The platform crashed instantly.
Red flag number two… and three.
- Performance: Disappointing.
I expected more here. Hopefully DronaHQ shows some meaningful improvement in future tests on other aspects of enterprise app building.
5) Final Verdict
Both Retool and ToolJet are fast. Both can handle very complex apps. Both passed every realistic benchmark.
Appsmith crashing at the very first step, and DronaHQ returning truncated data (and then crashing), didn’t inspire a lot of confidence.
If you’re choosing between Retool and ToolJet, performance should not stop you from picking either. They’re both enterprise-grade and fast.
ToolJet’s slight edge on query execution can be beneficial in extreme cases. But overall, both platforms perform well. For complex apps, you won’t go wrong with either.
Top comments (0)