When comparing Material Components for the Web vs Materialize, the Slant community recommends Materialize for most people. In the question“What are the best frameworks/libraries for implementing material design on the web?” Materialize is ranked 3rd while Material Components for the Web is ranked 8th.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Can be wrapped in common frameworks
There's already wrappers for Vue, Angular, etc.
Pro Web components
Pro Open Source
Pro Framework Agnostic
No dependency on Angular, Polymer, React or any other.
Pro Made by the core Material Design development team
Pro Great-looking demo
Pro Device agnostic
Since Materialize follows Google's guidelines for Material design, which in theory is device agnostic, Materialize itself is device agnostic too. It's designed to look good on every device.
Pro Large selection of components
CSS components: Badges, buttons, cards, collections, footer, forms, icons, navbar, pagination, preloader.
JavaScript components: Collapsible, Dialogs, Dropdown, Media, Modals, Parallax, Pushpin, ScrollFire, Scrollspy, SideNav, Tabs, Transitions, Waves.
Mobile-specific: slide-out drawer menu, toasts.
Pro Responsive
Pro Mobile navigation
Pro Nice showcase of sites built with Materialize
Pro Customizable
While the default style is not bad at all, Materialize also gives developers the ability to customize it and fit their own style, while still keeping in line with the Material Design philosophy.
Along with the CSS files, designers can also download the SASS files which can be edited and compiled.
Pro 12-Column Grid System
Pro Included icon font
Pro Meteor.js integration by developers
Pro Opinionated
Material design is very opinionated on how design elements should behave and look. The basics of which revolve around certain visual elements (physics, space, momentum and light) which are used to create specific UX elements.
This is very helpful because it creates a consistent feel without making every design look the same. This can be seen in Materialize too, where each element may be customized but still it keeps the consistent look of the material design.
Cons
Con For modern browsers only
Con Refuses to use the flexbox model
Even though Materialize states that it only supports IE10+, which supports flexbox quite well, with prefixes, Materialize has refused to use Flexbox.
Con Not maintained anymore
Con Large / heavy
267 kilobytes, minified, for the CSS and JS.
Con Deprecated
No longer supported by their maintainers.