browser-use vs page-agent
browser-use is much bigger: 112.3k stars against 29.0k. Over the days we have tracked them browser-use moved +6.9% and page-agent +18.2%, so page-agent is growing faster right now.
They split the axes: browser-use leads on customization, page-agent on setup ease.
Stars and commit dates come from our own daily tracking. The six axes are read off each project's documentation by our review pipeline, so they describe what a project says about itself, not what we measured in its code.
Where they stand today
An open-source browser agent that runs locally and is extensible with custom tools and provider‑prefixed models, enabling reproducible, privacy-friendly web automation.
- Stars
- 112.3k
- Tracked growth
- +6.9%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 4h ago
- Language
- Python
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Your LLM API key (or run free local models).
An in-page GUI agent that runs entirely inside any web page with a single script, no extension or headless browser required.
- Stars
- 29.0k
- Tracked growth
- +18.2%
- Maturity
- ●●●●●
- Last commit
- 1d ago
- Language
- TypeScript
- License
- MIT
- Cost to run
- Demo testing LLM available; otherwise use your API key
Six axes, head to head
Each axis runs 0 to 5. The label under a score is what that project's own docs claim, not a category average.
| Axis | browser-use | page-agent |
|---|---|---|
Context depth How much of your codebase it sees before it answers: the open diff, the diff plus related files, or the whole repository. | ●●●●● Diff only | ●●●●● Single-page only |
Noise control How it keeps output volume down — severity thresholds, deduplication, incremental runs over new commits only. | ●●●●● None mentioned | ●●●●● No noise controls |
Customization How far it bends to your team: custom rules, prompts, style guides, per-path config. | ●●●●● Custom tools & prompts | ●●●●● Config options |
Privacy Whether your code stays on your own infrastructure: fully local, self-hostable, or cloud API only. | ●●●●● Fully local capable | ●●●●● Self-hostable |
Model freedom Whether you can point it at any provider, or it is wired to one. | ●●●●● Bring-your-own / local | ●●●●● Bring-your-own-key |
Setup ease What it takes to get a first useful run out of it. | ●●●●● API key + install | ●●●●● One-line integration |
Which one to pick
Pick browser-use if…
Open-source & flexible — pick any LLM (including local models), add custom tools, and run browser automation on your machine.
- Customization: Custom tools & prompts (5/5 against 3/5)
Pick page-agent if…
Easy integration — one-line in-page script to add an AI copilot to any web app, with support for your own and locally deployed models.
- Setup ease: One-line integration (5/5 against 3/5)
What people want from each one
browser-use/browser-use
Hacker News: Launch HN: Browser Use (YC W25) – open-source web agents drew 259 points and 100 comments.
alibaba/page-agent
Hacker News: Page-Agent.js: The GUI Agent Living in Your Webpage drew 3 points and 0 comments.
Questions people ask
Is browser-use better than page-agent?
They split the axes: browser-use leads on customization, page-agent on setup ease. browser-use is worth picking when open-source & flexible — pick any LLM (including local models), add custom tools, and run browser automation on your machine.
Which of browser-use and page-agent keeps my code private?
browser-use: Fully local capable (5/5). page-agent: Self-hostable (4/5).
What does each one cost to run?
browser-use: Your LLM API key (or run free local models).. page-agent: Demo testing LLM available; otherwise use your API key.
Full profiles: browser-use/browser-use and alibaba/page-agent. Everything else in Browser agents.