Blazor Blueprint vs MudBlazor
Both are free, permissively licensed and written in C#. The real choice is a design language: Material Design, or shadcn/ui. MudBlazor has the larger community and the longer track record; Blazor Blueprint has the headless layer, the scheduler and a much deeper set of form inputs.
Written by the Blazor Blueprint team. We have tried to be fair rather than flattering — every claim about MudBlazor comes from their own published material, linked at the foot of the page, and was checked on 2026-09-20.
The short answer
Neither library is the right answer for everyone. Here is when each one wins.
Choose MudBlazor if
- You want Material Design. MudBlazor follows it properly, and if that is the look you are after there is no reason to fight it.
- You are on .NET 8 or .NET 9. MudBlazor 9 supports .NET 8, 9 and 10; Blazor Blueprint 4 targets .NET 10.
- Community size matters to you. MudBlazor is the most widely used Blazor component library, which means more Stack Overflow answers, more blog posts and more people who have hit your bug already.
- You would rather not touch CSS at all. MudBlazor is explicit that you can build a good-looking app without writing any.
Choose Blazor Blueprint if
- You want the shadcn/ui design language. Themes from that ecosystem work directly, and developers who have used it will already know the API.
- You need to style components yourself. The headless primitives give you every keyboard and screen-reader behaviour with none of the CSS.
- You need a scheduler, an event calendar or a filter builder. MudBlazor does not ship any of them.
- Your forms are complicated. Currency, masked, one-time-code, tag, cascading and tree inputs all ship as their own components.
- Your legal team asks about patents. Apache 2.0 carries an express patent grant and a retaliation clause; MIT is silent on patents.
Side by side
A dash means the library does not advertise it, not that it cannot do it — we only know what each project publishes.
| Blazor Blueprint | MudBlazor | |
|---|---|---|
| Licence | Apache 2.0, free | MIT, free |
| Design language | shadcn/ui | Material Design |
| Headless primitives | 38 | — |
| Whole-screen blueprints | 64 | — |
| .NET support | .NET 10 | .NET 8, 9 and 10 |
| Community size | Newer, smaller | The largest in Blazor |
| Theming | CSS variables, tweakcn-compatible | MudTheme, configured in C# |
| AI tooling | MCP server and llms.txt | — |
Component counts are not comparable between libraries. Every project counts differently — variants, sub-components and layout helpers all get counted by somebody. Treat the numbers as a rough scale, not a score.
Component by component
Every row is a capability, not a component name. Hover a tick to see what each library calls it, and click ours to open its documentation. Sub-features such as data-grid editing modes are left out: those are parameters on a component rather than components, and counting them would flatter us.
- Both
- 65
- Only us
- 69
- Only MudBlazor
- 0
- Not needed
- 9
- Has it
- Being built now
- Not needed — hover for why
- Not available
We have annotated our own gaps and not MudBlazor's, because we know our library and not theirs. Several of their crosses will have equally good answers — a parameter on another component, or a pattern their design language handles differently. Take the crosses in their column with that in mind, and check anything that decides it for you.
Where these facts came from
Checked on 2026-09-20. If something here is out of date or wrong, open an issue and we will fix it.
MudBlazor is a product of its respective owners and is not affiliated with or endorsed by Blazor Blueprint. Trademarks belong to their owners and are used here only to identify the product being compared.
Try it before you decide
One package reference, one stylesheet, and all 149 components are on the page.