Learn how Browser Use and Skyvern differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these browser automation for ai tools is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
1 day agoRepository age
2 yearsVersion
0.13.14License
MITRepository
browser-use
Last 30 days
Last commit
9 hours agoRepository age
3 yearsVersion
v1.0.56License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
skyvern-ai/skyvern
Browser Use appears to have several advantages over Skyvern, particularly in popularity, growth and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Browser Use significantly outpaces Skyvern in community adoption with 119,301 stars compared to 23,286 stars on GitHub. This 5.1x difference suggests Browser Use has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Browser Use has 13,265 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Browser Use is growing faster, adding 2,801 stars in the last 30 days (+2.4%) against adding 201 stars for Skyvern (+0.9%). Browser Use is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Browser Use last updated 1 day ago and Skyvern 9 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, Bash, Python. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Skyvern leverages CSS, Typescript, JSX.
Both projects started around the same time, with Browser Use beginning 2 years ago and Skyvern 3 years ago.
Browser Use uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Skyvern's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Browser Automation for AI.
Skyvern provides self-hosting options for complete data control and customization, while Browser Use may be primarily cloud-based or require different deployment approaches.