head to head · open source
Browser Use vs button-card
Browser Use has 119,857 GitHub stars, 13,358 forks, 421 open issues and last shipped yesterday. button-card has 2,523 stars, 285 forks, 31 open issues and last shipped 2 months ago. Browser Use leads on adoption by 4,651% (119,857 vs 2,523 stars). Browser Use is written in Python under MIT; button-card is written in TypeScript under MIT. Browser Use has attracted 11% as many forks as stars, button-card 11%. Browser Use was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee.
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 | button-card | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 120K | ★ 2.5K |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Written in | Python | TypeScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-09-09 |
| Forks | ⑂ 13K | ⑂ 285 |
| 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 button-card if
- You want the button-card feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches TypeScript
- You evaluated both and button-card 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 button-card
Button Card by @RomRider [![Stable][releases shield]][releases] [![Beta][releases dev shield]][releases dev] [![HACS Badge][hacs badge]][hacs link] ![Project Maintenance][maintenance shield] ![Downloads][downloads] [![GitHub Activity][commits shield]][commits] [![License][license shield]](LICENSE.md) [![Discord][discord shield]][discord] [![Community Forum][forum shield]][forum] [commits shield]: [commits]: [discord]: [discord shield]: [forum shield]: [forum]: [license shield]: [maintenance shield]: [releases shield]: [releases]: [releases dev shield]: [releases dev]: [hacs badge]: [downloads]: [hacs link]…
read the full button-card 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 button-card more popular?
Browser Use has 119,857 GitHub stars and button-card has 2,523. Browser Use has the larger community by that measure.
Are Browser Use and button-card free?
Both are open source. Browser Use is licensed under MIT and button-card under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Browser Use and button-card?
Browser Use is written in Python and button-card in TypeScript. 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 button-card?
Choose Browser Use if you want the larger community (119,857 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose button-card if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.