head to head · open source

obscura vs nanobrowser

obscura has 27,406 GitHub stars, 2,011 forks, 134 open issues and last shipped yesterday. nanobrowser has 13,810 stars, 1,459 forks, 81 open issues and last shipped 1 months ago. obscura leads on adoption by 98% (27,406 vs 13,810 stars). obscura is written in Rust under Apache-2.0; nanobrowser is written in TypeScript under Apache-2.0. obscura has attracted 7% as many forks as stars, nanobrowser 11%. obscura was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 2 topic tags (browser, 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.

obscura ★ 27K nanobrowser ★ 14K category Productivity & Utilities

← all 20902 open source comparisons

Side by side

obscura nanobrowser
GitHub stars ★ 27K ★ 14K
License Apache-2.0 Apache-2.0
Written in Rust TypeScript
Last push 2026-09-19 2026-08-18
Forks ⑂ 2.0K ⑂ 1.5K
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick obscura if

  • You weight community size — 27K stars and counting
  • You want the Apache-2.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Rust
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full obscura profile →

pick nanobrowser if

  • You want the nanobrowser 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 nanobrowser fits your workflow better

full nanobrowser profile →

About obscura

Obscura is an open source headless browser engine written in Rust, built for web scraping and AI agent automation. It runs real JavaScript through V8, speaks the Chrome DevTools Protocol, and presents itself as a drop in replacement for headless Chrome when driven by Puppeteer or Playwright. The project lives in the browser automation and headless browser corner of the Rust ecosystem, and it ships under the Apache 2.0 license.

read the full obscura overview →

About nanobrowser

Nanobrowser is an open source Chrome extension for AI powered web automation that runs multi agent workflows inside your own browser using your own LLM API key, built for people who want Operator style browser agents without a subscription.

read the full nanobrowser overview →

More in Productivity & Utilities

n8n ★ 205K Excalidraw ★ 132K RustDesk ★ 124K LocalSend ★ 92K AppFlowy ★ 77K OBS Studio ★ 76K

Related comparisons

playwright vs obscura vscode vs monaco-editor browser-use vs chrome-devtools-mcp playwright vs chrome-devtools-mcp puppeteer vs chrome-devtools-mcp ublock vs ladybird ublock vs chrome-devtools-mcp ladybird vs chrome-devtools-mcp openclaw vs khoj open-webui vs open-notebook open-webui vs khoj appflowy vs affine appflowy vs memos appflowy vs plane appflowy vs joplin mem0 vs memos n8n vs langchain n8n vs browser-use firecrawl vs browser-use n8n vs langgraph n8n vs frigate n8n vs lightpanda n8n vs proxmoxve n8n vs activepieces

More Browsers & Extensions projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Browsers & Extensions field.

obscura vs uBlock obscura vs Ladybird obscura vs chrome-devtools-mcp obscura vs monaco-editor obscura vs Zen Browser obscura vs servo obscura vs serenity obscura vs refined-github obscura vs slate obscura vs Avalonia obscura vs webtorrent obscura vs fingerprintjs

Frequently asked questions

Is obscura or nanobrowser more popular?

obscura has 27,406 GitHub stars and nanobrowser has 13,810. obscura has the larger community by that measure.

Are obscura and nanobrowser free?

Both are open source. obscura is licensed under Apache-2.0 and nanobrowser under Apache-2.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between obscura and nanobrowser?

obscura is written in Rust and nanobrowser 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, obscura or nanobrowser?

Choose obscura if you want the larger community (27,406 stars) or its Apache-2.0 licence terms. Choose nanobrowser if its feature set, stack or Apache-2.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.