head to head · open source
CloakBrowser vs browserless
CloakBrowser has 32,712 GitHub stars, 2,720 forks, 164 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. browserless has 1,845 stars, 93 forks, 6 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. CloakBrowser leads on adoption by 1,673% (32,712 vs 1,845 stars). CloakBrowser is written in Python under MIT; browserless is written in JavaScript under MIT. CloakBrowser has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, browserless 5%. CloakBrowser was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 1 topic tag (chromium), 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
| CloakBrowser | browserless | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 33K | ★ 1.8K |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Written in | Python | JavaScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-03 | 2026-11-03 |
| Forks | ⑂ 2.7K | ⑂ 93 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick CloakBrowser if
- You weight community size — 33K stars and counting
- You want the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches Python
- You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance
pick browserless if
- You want the browserless feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the MIT license terms
- Your stack matches JavaScript
- You evaluated both and browserless fits your workflow better
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 →
About browserless
The headless Chrome/Chromium driver on top of Puppeteer. Highlights Installation Usage The cloud API solution CLI Initializing a browser .constructor(options) .createContext(options) .browser() .respawn() .close() Built in .html(url, options) .text(url, options) .pdf(url, options) .screenshot(url, options) .destroyContext(options) .getDevice(options) .evaluate(fn, gotoOpts) .goto(page, options) .context() [.withPage(fn, \[options\])]( withpagefn options) [.page(\[name\])]( pagename) Extended ai function lighthouse screencast Packages FAQ License Highlights Compatible with Puppeteer API (text, screenshot, html…
read the full browserless 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 CloakBrowser or browserless more popular?
CloakBrowser has 32,712 GitHub stars and browserless has 1,845. CloakBrowser has the larger community by that measure.
Are CloakBrowser and browserless free?
Both are open source. CloakBrowser is licensed under MIT and browserless under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between CloakBrowser and browserless?
CloakBrowser is written in Python and browserless in JavaScript. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.
Which should I choose, CloakBrowser or browserless?
Choose CloakBrowser if you want the larger community (32,712 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose browserless if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.