# StatsBase vs Statistics

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/statsbase-vs-statistics/15326>\
**Category:** Statistics\
**Tags:** package\
**Created:** [September 22, 2018, 4:04am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/statsbase-vs-statistics/15326 "2018-09-22T04:04:11Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 9

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Tamas\_Papp](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/tamas_papp/32/25949_2.png) [@Tamas\_Papp](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Tamas_Papp)\
**Post date:** [May 24, 2021, 12:31pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/statsbase-vs-statistics/15326/9 "2021-05-24T12:31:10Z")

</div>

> [@pdeffebach](#):
>
> There is no deep reason why StatsBase still exists in it’s current form and we haven’t put more things into Statistics.

I think one of the reasons is the implicit cost of a commitment to maintenance and a specific API that comes with standard library version being tied to Julia. See [this summary here](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julia-standard-library-for-interval-type/60936/7).

While arguably _some_ functionality could be moved from StatsBase to Statistics, it is unlikely that the API for the whole package is that finalized and/or belongs in a standard library. OTOH, there is no pressing need to move anything, after all there is a package and people can just use it.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/statsbase-vs-statistics/15326)._