head to head · open source
Browser Use vs browser-harness
Browser Use has 119,857 GitHub stars, 13,358 forks, 421 open issues and last shipped yesterday. browser-harness has 18,821 stars, 1,858 forks, 353 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Browser Use leads on adoption by 537% (119,857 vs 18,821 stars). Browser Use is written in Python under MIT; browser-harness is written in Python under MIT. Browser Use has attracted 11% as many forks as stars, browser-harness 10%. browser-harness was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 5 topic tags (browser-agent, browser-automation, browser-use, cdp), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.
Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.
← all 20902 open source comparisons
Side by side
| Browser Use | browser-harness | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 120K | ★ 19K |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Written in | Python | Python |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-11-02 |
| Forks | ⑂ 13K | ⑂ 1.9K |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick Browser Use if
- You weight community size — 120K stars and counting
- You want the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick browser-harness if
- You want the browser-harness feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You evaluated both and browser-harness fits your workflow better
About Browser Use
Navigate the web like a human does. Find an available slot, pick a date and time, handle the CAPTCHA, and book a driving test. Explore more demos and prompts ↗ Which Browser Use do I need? Path 1: Fully Hosted Cloud: Scale up with a fully hosted agent and browser. Path 2: CLI: Automate your own browser tasks. Path 3: Python Library: Run the open source Browser Use agent locally from your own code. Quickstart Path 1: Fully Hosted Cloud Scale browser automation with our hosted agent, stealth browsers, and infrastructure for profiles, recordings, and data policies. Get started with the API ↗ New Google, GitHub, or…
read the full Browser Use overview →
About browser-harness
Browser Harness ♞ Connect an LLM directly to your real browser through one editable CDP websocket. The agent writes missing helpers as it works, so the harness improves with every task. Try browser harness in Browser Use Cloud or paste the setup prompt into your coding agent. You will never use the browser again. See it work Task: "Open my X profile, find my latest 20 video posts, and download them." Setup prompt Paste into Claude Code or Codex: The agent will open chrome://inspect/ remote debugging . On first setup, tick the checkbox so the agent can connect to your browser: How it works install.md connects the…
read the full browser-harness overview →
More in Data & Analytics
Related comparisons
More Data Extraction & Web Scraping projects
Compare either of these against the rest of the Data Extraction & Web Scraping field.
Frequently asked questions
Is Browser Use or browser-harness more popular?
Browser Use has 119,857 GitHub stars and browser-harness has 18,821. Browser Use has the larger community by that measure.
Are Browser Use and browser-harness free?
Both are open source. Browser Use is licensed under MIT and browser-harness under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Browser Use and browser-harness?
Browser Use is written in Python and browser-harness in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, Browser Use or browser-harness?
Choose Browser Use if you want the larger community (119,857 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose browser-harness if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.