head to head · open source
Browser Use vs CloakBrowser
Browser Use has 119,977 GitHub stars, 13,371 forks, 421 open issues and last shipped 3 days ago. CloakBrowser has 32,712 stars, 2,720 forks, 164 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. Browser Use leads on adoption by 267% (119,977 vs 32,712 stars). Browser Use is written in Python under MIT; CloakBrowser is written in Python under MIT. Browser Use has attracted 11% as many forks as stars, CloakBrowser 8%. CloakBrowser was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 4 topic tags (ai-agents, browser-automation, headless-browser, playwright), 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 | CloakBrowser | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 120K | ★ 33K |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Written in | Python | Python |
| Last push | 2026-11-02 | 2026-11-03 |
| Forks | ⑂ 13K | ⑂ 2.7K |
| 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 CloakBrowser if
- You want the CloakBrowser feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You evaluated both and CloakBrowser 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 CloakBrowser
Stealth Chromium that passes every bot detection test. Not a patched config. Not a JS injection. A real Chromium binary with fingerprints modified at the C++ source level. Antibot systems score it as a normal browser — because it is a normal browser. Cloudflare Turnstile — 3 live tests passing (headed mode, macOS) Drop in Playwright/Puppeteer replacement for Python and JavaScript. Same API, same code — just swap the import. 3 lines of code, 30 seconds to unblock. 87 source level C++ patches — canvas, WebGL, audio, fonts, GPU, screen, WebRTC, network timing, automation signals, CDP input behavior humanize=True —…
read the full CloakBrowser 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 CloakBrowser more popular?
Browser Use has 119,977 GitHub stars and CloakBrowser has 32,712. Browser Use has the larger community by that measure.
Are Browser Use and CloakBrowser free?
Both are open source. Browser Use is licensed under MIT and CloakBrowser under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Browser Use and CloakBrowser?
Browser Use is written in Python and CloakBrowser 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 CloakBrowser?
Choose Browser Use if you want the larger community (119,977 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose CloakBrowser if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.