Comparison

JSON vs XML

JSON is more compact, maps directly onto the data structures of most languages, and has become the default for web APIs. XML is more verbose but carries features JSON lacks: attributes, namespaces, mature schema validation and XPath querying. Use JSON for APIs and configuration; use XML for documents, mixed content and systems that already depend on it.

XML to JSON Converter

Convert any XML document into readable JSON.

Open the tool

XML dominated interchange in the 2000s and JSON largely displaced it for APIs in the 2010s. That was not because XML is bad, but because most API payloads are simple records, and for simple records XML's document-oriented machinery is overhead you pay for and do not use.

Where the payload really is a document — with mixed content, attributes and a schema that has to be enforced — XML's extra machinery stops being overhead and starts being the reason to choose it.

Where JSON wins

A JSON object maps directly onto a dictionary or hash in essentially every modern language, so parsing produces something you can use immediately with no mapping layer.

  • Far less verbose: no closing tags to repeat.
  • Maps directly onto native language types.
  • Native in browsers via JSON.parse, with no library needed.
  • Simpler to read for straightforward record data.

Where XML wins

XML distinguishes attributes from elements, supports namespaces so vocabularies from different sources can coexist in one document, and has mature, widely implemented schema validation.

  • Attributes, giving metadata a place separate from content.
  • Namespaces, so two vocabularies can safely mix.
  • XSD schema validation, far more mature than JSON Schema tooling.
  • XPath and XSLT for querying and transforming documents.
  • Mixed content: text and markup interleaved, as in real documents.

Security differences

XML parsers carry risks JSON parsers do not. External entity resolution can be abused to read local files or make outbound requests (XXE), and entity expansion can be used to exhaust memory — the "billion laughs" attack. Both are mitigated by disabling entity processing, which every parser should do by default on untrusted input.

Where each is still standard

XML remains the format for RSS and Atom feeds, sitemaps, SOAP services, SVG, the internals of Office documents and a great deal of enterprise and financial messaging. JSON is the default for REST and GraphQL APIs, configuration and logging. Neither is going away.

Example

The same record. XML separates the id attribute from the element content; JSON has only keys.

XML

<user id="42" active="true">
  <name>Ada Lovelace</name>
  <email>ada@example.com</email>
</user>

JSON

{
  "id": 42,
  "active": true,
  "name": "Ada Lovelace",
  "email": "ada@example.com"
}

Frequently asked questions

Is XML obsolete?
No. It lost the API argument to JSON but remains standard for RSS and Atom, sitemaps, SVG, SOAP, Office document internals and a great deal of financial and enterprise messaging. Those are not legacy systems in decline; they are current standards.
Which is more secure?
JSON parsing has a smaller attack surface. XML parsers must be configured to disable external entity resolution to avoid XXE, and to limit entity expansion to avoid memory exhaustion. Both risks are well understood and mitigated by default in modern parsers, but they exist.
Does JSON have schema validation?
Yes, JSON Schema, and it is capable. XSD is older with broader tooling, especially in enterprise environments, but JSON Schema is entirely adequate for validating API payloads and is now well supported.
How are XML attributes converted to JSON?
By convention, since JSON has no attribute concept. Converters prefix attribute keys to keep them distinct from child elements, so an id attribute and an id child element do not collide.
Which is faster to parse?
JSON, by a wide margin. Its grammar is much simpler and the payloads are smaller, which reduces both parse time and bytes over the wire.

Tools used in this guide

All tools →
All guides →

Last reviewed .