head to head · open source
Browser Use vs workflow-use
Browser Use has 120,227 GitHub stars, 13,414 forks, 421 open issues and last shipped yesterday. workflow-use has 4,247 stars, 356 forks, 61 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. Browser Use leads on adoption by 2,731% (120,227 vs 4,247 stars). Browser Use is written in Python under MIT; workflow-use is written in Python under AGPL-3.0. Browser Use has attracted 11% as many forks as stars, workflow-use 8%. 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 (browser-automation), 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 | workflow-use | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 120K | ★ 4.2K |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Written in | Python | Python |
| Last push | 2026-11-07 | 2026-11-06 |
| Forks | ⑂ 13K | ⑂ 356 |
| 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 workflow-use if
- You want the workflow-use feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the AGPL-3.0 license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You evaluated both and workflow-use 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 workflow-use
Deterministic, Self Healing Workflows (RPA 2.0) ⚙️ Workflow Use is the easiest way to create and execute deterministic workflows with variables which fallback to Browser Use if a step fails. You just show the recorder the workflow, we automatically generate the workflow. ❗ This project is in very early development so we don't recommend using this in production. Lots of things will change and we don't have a release schedule yet. Originally, the project was born out of customer demand to make Browser Use more reliable and deterministic. 🚀 NEW: Generation Mode Automatically generate workflows from natural…
read the full workflow-use 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 workflow-use more popular?
Browser Use has 120,227 GitHub stars and workflow-use has 4,247. Browser Use has the larger community by that measure.
Are Browser Use and workflow-use free?
Both are open source. Browser Use is licensed under MIT and workflow-use under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Browser Use and workflow-use?
Browser Use is written in Python and workflow-use 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 workflow-use?
Choose Browser Use if you want the larger community (120,227 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose workflow-use if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.