Several recent assemblers are faster than WENGAN. For nanopore, there are shasta and wtdbg2 (both published). For HiFi, there are Peregrine and hifiasm (both un

Several recent assemblers are faster than WENGAN. For nanopore, there are shasta and wtdbg2 (both published). For HiFi, there are Peregrine and hifiasm (both unpublished but with preprints). I also found their phrasing here misleading: "The run time of WENGAN was at least 183 times faster than that of CANU (UL), while at the same time using less memory than other assemblers such as FLYE and SHASTA". Why not say the other way around (which is also a fact): The run time of WENGAN was at least several times slower than that of shasta, while at the same time using more memory than CANU. Come on, this is not the right way to do comparisons!