StackMap
Subscribe

browser-use vs eko

The standard library for letting AI agents drive a real browser — click, type, fill forms and complete tasks from a natural-language goal. 100k+ stars, Python. — versus — Production JavaScript framework for agentic workflows: one sentence becomes a dependency-aware multi-agent plan that runs in browser, Node, or extension — with pause/resume and snapshot recovery.

The curated verdict

Eko's own comparison target: Browser-use owns the browser-automation niche in Python; Eko covers browser AND computer environments from one JS workflow.

browser-useeko
Stars108k4.9k
Forks12k441
LanguagePythonTypeScript
LicenseMITMIT
Last activity4 days ago5 months ago
Topicsagents, webagents, orchestration
Curated connections112

browser-use — the curator's take

When the task lives behind login walls, forms and JavaScript — 'book this', 'apply to that', 'put these in my cart' — this is the default tool: it feeds the agent a cleaned DOM, executes its clicks/typing, and recovers from the endless weirdness of real websites. Install-as-skill support means Claude Code/Cursor agents pick it up in one prompt. NOT for bulk data extraction — an LLM driving a browser is the slowest, most expensive way to scrape a thousand pages (use a crawler); and treat any agent-with-a-browser as having the keys to whatever it's logged into — sandbox accordingly.

eko — the curator's take

The JS-native, runs-anywhere bet is the differentiator: the same workflow executes in a browser extension, a web page or a server, which no Python framework offers — and 4.0's pause/interrupt/snapshot controls are production concerns most frameworks defer. When NOT: the deep ecosystem (integrations, community patterns, papers) still lives in Python — teams already on LangGraph gain little; and Fellou the company steers the roadmap, so watch for platform gravity.