head to head · open source
Browser Use vs pdf_oxide
Browser Use has 119,977 GitHub stars, 13,371 forks, 421 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. pdf_oxide has 1,163 stars, 149 forks, 322 open issues and last shipped 5 days ago. Browser Use leads on adoption by 10,216% (119,977 vs 1,163 stars). Browser Use is written in Python under MIT; pdf_oxide is written in Rust under Apache-2.0. Browser Use has attracted 11% as many forks as stars, pdf_oxide 13%. Browser Use was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (llm), 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 | pdf_oxide | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 120K | ★ 1.2K |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Written in | Python | Rust |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-10-31 |
| Forks | ⑂ 13K | ⑂ 149 |
| 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 pdf_oxide if
- You want the pdf_oxide feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
- Your stack matches Rust
- You evaluated both and pdf_oxide 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 pdf_oxide
PDFOxide The Fastest PDF Toolkit for 20 Languages — Python, Rust, Go, JS/TS, C , Java, Kotlin, Swift, C++ & more, plus CLI & AI New in v0.3.69 — eleven new language bindings. PDFOxide now ships idiomatic bindings for C++, Swift, Kotlin, Dart, R, Julia, Zig, Scala, Clojure, Objective C, and Elixir , each built over the stable C ABI with its own CI workflow, api coverage tests, and runnable examples. That brings the toolkit to 20 languages (Rust core + 19 bindings). Want another language? Open an issue and tell us. The fastest PDF library for text extraction, image extraction, and markdown conversion. A Rust core…
read the full pdf_oxide 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 pdf_oxide more popular?
Browser Use has 119,977 GitHub stars and pdf_oxide has 1,163. Browser Use has the larger community by that measure.
Are Browser Use and pdf_oxide free?
Both are open source. Browser Use is licensed under MIT and pdf_oxide under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Browser Use and pdf_oxide?
Browser Use is written in Python and pdf_oxide in Rust. 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 pdf_oxide?
Choose Browser Use if you want the larger community (119,977 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose pdf_oxide if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.