performance
performance keeps adding ways to check a model you have already fitted.
A side-by-side editorial comparison of modeltime and tidyr — release velocity, themes, recent moves, and the top alternatives to consider.
modeltime built conformal intervals in, then went quiet on features.
modeltime is at 1.3.3, a single change making the package robust to xgboost version shifts. The feature weight sits in 1.3.2, which added a future-based parallel backend, the maape() accuracy metric and dials helpers for ADAM engine tuning, and further back in the 1.2.8 and 1.3.0 pair that introduced conformal prediction intervals and then carried them through the nested forecasting workflow.
tidyr replaced separate() with a family that says what it does.
tidyr is at 1.3.2, a collection of argument additions — fill() gains .by, expand_grid() gains .vary — and better error messages around unchop() and pivot_wider_spec(). The structural work is 1.3.0, which introduced separate_wider_delim(), separate_wider_position(), separate_wider_regex(), separate_longer_delim() and separate_longer_position() as thorough replacements for separate(), extract() and separate_rows().
modeltime is at 1.3.3, a single change making the package robust to xgboost version shifts. The feature weight sits in 1.3.2, which added a future-based parallel backend, the maape() accuracy metric and dials helpers for ADAM engine tuning, and further back in the 1.2.8 and 1.3.0 pair that introduced conformal prediction intervals and then carried them through the nested forecasting workflow.
The arc runs from uncertainty quantification to execution. Conformal intervals arrived first and were then threaded through nested fitting, refitting and the printed forecast tables so users can see which confidence method produced an interval. The later work moves down a layer to how forecasts are computed — a portable future backend replacing foreach tuning — rather than what they express.
With only an xgboost compatibility fix since the 1.3.2 feature release, the entries do not support a confident prediction about what comes next beyond continued dependency maintenance.
tidyr is at 1.3.2, a collection of argument additions — fill() gains .by, expand_grid() gains .vary — and better error messages around unchop() and pivot_wider_spec(). The structural work is 1.3.0, which introduced separate_wider_delim(), separate_wider_position(), separate_wider_regex(), separate_longer_delim() and separate_longer_position() as thorough replacements for separate(), extract() and separate_rows().
Two habits define this window. Verbs are being split into explicitly named variants rather than overloaded with arguments, which is what the separate_* family does to separate(). And .by is spreading as the standard way to express grouping inline — nest(.by=) in 1.3.0, fill(.by=) in 1.3.2 — pulling users away from wrapping calls in group_by().
Given that .by has now reached fill() and nest(), the next release most likely extends the same argument to further verbs rather than reworking another function family.
Other Analytics products tracked by Sparkpulse, ranked by recent ship velocity. Each card links to a full editorial trajectory and lets you pivot into a head-to-head comparison with either modeltime or tidyr.
performance keeps adding ways to check a model you have already fitted.
CmdStanPy is clearing deprecations ahead of a 2.0 it keeps announcing.
DoWhy adds one estimation method a year and keeps its identification edge.
OpenHouse is hardening the seams where table policies and jobs quietly fail.
silx 3.0 moved its default Qt binding to PySide6 — a migration for everyone embedding it.
statsmodels ships only what the ecosystem breaks — six releases, no new statistics.
See all modeltime alternatives → · See all tidyr alternatives →
Latest ship moves from both products, interleaved chronologically. ⚡ = editorial spark.
Both compete on the same themes — r-language — within Analytics. modeltime and tidyr are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). See the at-a-glance table above for a side-by-side breakdown of velocity, recent sparks, and editorial themes.
Sparkpulse doesn't pick a winner — we score release velocity, not feature parity. modeltime and tidyr are shipping at a similar cadence (velocity 0.0 vs 0.0, both within Sparkpulse's "active" band). For your specific use case, the alternatives sections above list other Analytics products to evaluate alongside.
Top modeltime alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "modeltime alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/modeltime for the full list with editorial commentary on each.
Top tidyr alternatives in Analytics are ranked by recent ship velocity. Browse the "tidyr alternatives" section above for the current picks, or visit /alternatives/tidyr for the full list with editorial commentary on each.