html4pdf vs Dompdf
Nearly every PHP project reaches for Dompdf first, usually through laravel-dompdf. It is free, installs with Composer, and needs nothing on the server. Then somebody applies a flexbox layout and the PDF arrives stacked.
The short answer
Dompdf is the right answer for a simple document on shared hosting with no extra services. It is the wrong answer for anything designed with modern CSS, because it implements CSS 2.1.
What Dompdf is
Dompdf is an HTML to PDF converter written entirely in PHP. It targets CSS 2.1 with some CSS 3 properties, needs no binary and no shell access, and works on hosting where you cannot install anything. For headings, paragraphs and tables it does a sound job.
Side by side
| Dompdf | html4pdf | |
|---|---|---|
| Rendering engine | Its own, in PHP, CSS 2.1 | Headless Chrome |
| Flexbox and grid | Not supported | Supported |
| JavaScript | Not executed | Runs before capture |
| Web fonts | Local fonts need registering, with caveats | Google Fonts and @font-face work |
| Install | Composer, no system dependencies | Nothing |
| Shared hosting | Works | Works, it is just an HTTPS call |
| Long documents | Slow and memory hungry past a few dozen pages | Handled server side |
| Cost | Free | From $0.033 per document |
Choose Dompdf when
- The document is simple: a heading, some paragraphs, a table.
- You want zero recurring cost and zero outbound calls.
- You are on hosting where you control nothing.
- It already works and nobody is changing the design.
Choose html4pdf when
- The invoice template uses flexbox or grid and arrives looking nothing like the preview.
- You need a web font, or a chart, or anything drawn by a script.
- Documents are long enough that Dompdf's memory use has become a problem.
- You want the PDF to match the page your designer approved, without maintaining a second stylesheet.
See the code
The working example, in the language this decision is being made in.
Dompdf: common questions
Does Dompdf support flexbox?
No. It implements CSS 2.1 with some additions, and flexbox is not part of that. Flex containers fall back to block layout, which is why columns arrive stacked.
Dompdf or mPDF?
mPDF handles tables, headers, footers and right-to-left text better, and is the stronger choice for long documents. Both implement their own engine, so neither gives you browser-accurate output.
Why is my Dompdf output so slow?
Layout runs in PHP, so cost grows with the number of elements. Large tables are the usual cause. Reducing nesting helps, but there is a ceiling.
Can I keep Dompdf for some documents?
Yes, and that is often the sensible move: leave the simple receipts where they are and route only the designed documents elsewhere.
Try it before you decide
New accounts get 10 free credits, no card. Send the HTML you already have and compare the output against whatever you are using now.
Other comparisons
- html4pdf vs PuppeteerRun Puppeteer yourself if PDFs are high volume and you already operate containers. Use an API if PDFs are a feature of your product and you do not want Chrome in your deployment.
- html4pdf vs wkhtmltopdfwkhtmltopdf is still fine for simple documents you already have working. For anything new, or anything using modern CSS, its archived WebKit engine is the problem you will eventually hit.
- html4pdf vs WeasyPrintIf your document is HTML and CSS with no scripts, WeasyPrint is excellent and free, and you should use it. If anything on the page is drawn by JavaScript, you need a browser.
- html4pdf vs jsPDF and html2canvasjsPDF with html2canvas is free and needs no backend, and it produces a picture of your page rather than a document. If the text has to be selectable, searchable or printable at quality, it is the wrong tool.
- html4pdf vs @react-pdf/rendererUse react-pdf when the document is small, stable, and worth building as its own component tree. Use a renderer when the PDF should be the same thing your users already see on screen.
- html4pdf vs printing from the browserIf the user is the one who wants the PDF and is sitting in front of the page, use window.print() and a print stylesheet. If your system needs the file, you need a renderer.
- html4pdf vs PlaywrightPlaywright is the better browser automation library. It is not a better PDF pipeline, because the cost was never the library: it is operating the browser. Use it if you already run it, call an API if you do not.
- html4pdf vs running Chromium in a LambdaIt works, it is free, and it is the single most fiddly part of most codebases that do it. If your function is already near the size limit or your users wait on the first request, the trade has stopped paying.
- html4pdf vs GotenbergGotenberg is the right answer if you want this capability inside your own infrastructure and have somewhere to run a container. We are the right answer if you want it without running anything.
- html4pdf vs mPDFmPDF is the best free answer in PHP for long, table-heavy documents written as documents. It is still its own engine, so a design built in a browser will not arrive intact.
- html4pdf vs ReportLabReportLab is the right tool when the document is a fixed, precise artefact and you want no dependencies. It is the wrong tool when the design changes often, because every change is a code change.
- html4pdf vs iTextIf you need deep PDF manipulation on the JVM and can accept AGPL or buy a licence, iText is the strongest tool available. If you only need HTML turned into a document, the licence question is one you can skip entirely.
- html4pdf vs QuestPDFQuestPDF is excellent for documents you are happy to describe in C#. If the document already exists as a web page, you would be rebuilding it, and that duplication is the whole cost.
- html4pdf vs PDFKitPDFKit is a good fit for simple, fixed documents generated at volume, where no browser and no network is worth writing the layout by hand. Beyond that the hand-written layout becomes the problem.