When comparing aurman vs paru, the Slant community recommends paru for most people. In the question“What are the best AUR helpers for Arch-based Linux distributions?” paru is ranked 6th while aurman is ranked 9th. The most important reason people chose paru is:
You can simply alias yay=paru if you switch from yay.
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Native pacman compliant
Pro Secure
According to Archwiki: "does not source the PKGBUILD at all by default; or, alerts the user and offers the opportunity to inspect the PKGBUILD manually before it is sourced. Some helpers are known to source PKGBUILDs before the user can inspect them, allowing malicious code to be executed. Optional means that there is a command line flag or configuration option to prevent the automatic sourcing before viewing."
Pro Based on the design of yay
You can simply alias yay=paru if you switch from yay.
Pro Fast
Paru is faster than yay.
Pro Actively maintained
With the main yay developer stepping away from yay, paru is more actively maintained than yay.
Pro Saner defaults than yay
Cons
Con Tends to break easily
Due to a lot of Python dependencies, aurman tends to break after Python/libraries updates. Most of the time, the fix is as simple as reinstalling aurman.