head to head · open source
Skyvern vs browserless
Skyvern has 23,336 GitHub stars, 2,236 forks, 234 open issues and last shipped yesterday. browserless has 1,845 stars, 93 forks, 6 open issues and last shipped 2 days ago. Skyvern leads on adoption by 1,165% (23,336 vs 1,845 stars). Skyvern is written in Python under AGPL-3.0; browserless is written in JavaScript under MIT. Skyvern has attracted 10% as many forks as stars, browserless 5%. Skyvern was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 3 topic tags (automation, browser, puppeteer), 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
| Skyvern | browserless | |
|---|---|---|
| GitHub stars | ★ 23K | ★ 1.8K |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Written in | Python | JavaScript |
| Last push | 2026-11-04 | 2026-11-03 |
| Forks | ⑂ 2.2K | ⑂ 93 |
| Self-hosting | Yes | Yes |
| Data ownership | Your server | Your server |
pick Skyvern if
- You weight community size — 23K stars and counting
- You want the AGPL-3.0 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 Skyvern
🐉 Automate Browser based workflows using LLMs and Computer Vision 🐉 Skyvern automates browser based workflows using LLMs and computer vision. It provides a Playwright compatible SDK that adds AI functionality on top of playwright, as well as a no code workflow builder to help both technical and non technical users automate manual workflows on any website, replacing brittle or unreliable automation solutions. Traditional approaches to browser automations required writing custom scripts for websites, often relying on DOM parsing and XPath based interactions which would break whenever the website layouts changed…
read the full Skyvern 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 Skyvern or browserless more popular?
Skyvern has 23,336 GitHub stars and browserless has 1,845. Skyvern has the larger community by that measure.
Are Skyvern and browserless free?
Both are open source. Skyvern is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and browserless under MIT. Neither carries a licence fee.
What is the difference between Skyvern and browserless?
Skyvern 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, Skyvern or browserless?
Choose Skyvern if you want the larger community (23,336 stars) or its AGPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose browserless if its feature set, stack or MIT licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.