head to head · open source
Browser Use vs wreq
Browser Use has 119,977 GitHub stars, 13,371 forks, 421 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. wreq has 1,094 stars, 141 forks, 23 open issues and last shipped yesterday. Browser Use leads on adoption by 10,867% (119,977 vs 1,094 stars). Browser Use is written in Python under MIT; wreq is written in Rust under Apache-2.0. Browser Use has attracted 11% as many forks as stars, wreq 13%. wreq 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 | wreq | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 120K | ★ 1.1K |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Written in | Python | Rust |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-11-04 |
| Forks | ⑂ 13K | ⑂ 141 |
| 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 wreq if
- You want the wreq 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 wreq 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 wreq
wreq [![Discord chat][discord badge]][discord url] [discord badge]: [discord url]: 🚀 Help me work seamlessly with open source sharing by sponsoring me on GitHub An ergonomic and modular Rust HTTP Client for high fidelity protocol matching, featuring customizable TLS, JA3/JA4, and HTTP/2 signature capabilities. Features Plain bodies, JSON, urlencoded, multipart HTTP Trailer Cookie Store Redirect Policy Original Header Rotating Proxies Tower Middleware WebSocket Upgrade HTTPS via BoringSSL HTTP/2 over TLS Parity Certificate Store (CAs & mTLS) Multiple Runtime (Tokio, Compio) Example The following example uses the…
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 wreq more popular?
Browser Use has 119,977 GitHub stars and wreq has 1,094. Browser Use has the larger community by that measure.
Are Browser Use and wreq free?
Both are open source. Browser Use is licensed under MIT and wreq under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Browser Use and wreq?
Browser Use is written in Python and wreq 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 wreq?
Choose Browser Use if you want the larger community (119,977 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose wreq if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.