1. 1. Target audience: Pixi is primarily targeted towards game developers, providing a powerful rendering engine optimized for graphics-intensive applications. On the other hand, Two.js is more focused on providing a lightweight and simple solution for creating interactive 2D graphics and animations for the web.
2. 2. Rendering technology: Pixi utilizes WebGL, taking full advantage of hardware acceleration to deliver fast and smooth rendering. On the contrary, Two.js uses the HTML5 Canvas API for rendering, which offers broader compatibility but may be less performant in complex scenarios compared to WebGL.
3. 3. Feature set: Pixi boasts a wide range of features, including support for advanced rendering effects, sprite sheets, and filters. It also provides a scene graph, input handling, and an extensive ecosystem of plugins. Conversely, Two.js focuses on the essentials, providing a minimalistic feature set like shapes, lines, gradients, transformations, and animation tools.
4. 4. Learning curve: Pixi has a steeper learning curve due to its extensive capabilities and more complex API. It requires a higher level of proficiency in programming and graphics concepts. In contrast, Two.js has a shallower learning curve, making it more accessible for beginners and those with limited programming experience.
5. 5. Community and documentation: Pixi has a large and active community, which contributes to the ongoing updates, bug fixes, and development of the library. It also offers comprehensive documentation, tutorials, and example projects to assist developers in learning and using the library effectively. Two.js, on the other hand, has a smaller community and fewer resources available in terms of tutorials and documentation.
6. 6. Use cases: Pixi's extensive feature set and performance focus make it well-suited for complex game development, multimedia applications, and interactive visualizations that demand high-performance rendering. Two.js, with its simplicity and easy integration, is better suited for lightweight projects like data visualizations, infographics, and interactive web illustrations.

In Summary, Pixi is targeted towards game developers with advanced rendering capabilities using WebGL, while Two.js provides a lightweight and simple solution for 2D graphics and animations on the web. Pixi has a steeper learning curve, a broad feature set, and a larger community, while Two.js has a shallower learning curve, a minimalistic feature set, and is suitable for lightweight projects.