head to head · open source
CloakBrowser vs wa-js
CloakBrowser has 32,693 GitHub stars, 2,719 forks, 164 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. wa-js has 832 stars, 252 forks, 19 open issues and last shipped yesterday. CloakBrowser leads on adoption by 3,829% (32,693 vs 832 stars). CloakBrowser is written in Python under MIT; wa-js is written in TypeScript under Apache-2.0. CloakBrowser has attracted 8% as many forks as stars, wa-js 30%. wa-js 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
| CloakBrowser | wa-js | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 33K | ★ 832 |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Written in | Python | TypeScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-01 | 2026-11-02 |
| Forks | ⑂ 2.7K | ⑂ 252 |
| 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 wa-js if
- You want the wa-js feature set and don't need the biggest community
- You prefer the Apache-2.0 license terms
- Your stack matches TypeScript
- You evaluated both and wa-js 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 wa-js
English Português (Brasil) WPPConnect/WA JS Expose WhatsApp Web functions through the browser side WPP API. A project in the WPPConnect ecosystem, maintained by WPPConnect Team. Getting started Documentation Contributing Support WPPConnect Overview For extension and browser integration developers who need to execute code inside WhatsApp Web. The generated dist/wppconnect wa.js bundle exposes chat, contact, connection and other modules; it is not a Node.js WhatsApp client. Features Chat and media operations, groups, communities, channels and business catalog functions. Connection events, profile/privacy settings…
read the full wa-js 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 wa-js more popular?
CloakBrowser has 32,693 GitHub stars and wa-js has 832. CloakBrowser has the larger community by that measure.
Are CloakBrowser and wa-js free?
Both are open source. CloakBrowser is licensed under MIT and wa-js under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between CloakBrowser and wa-js?
CloakBrowser is written in Python and wa-js in TypeScript. 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 wa-js?
Choose CloakBrowser if you want the larger community (32,693 stars) or its MIT licence terms. Choose wa-js if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.