(grok) Comprehensive Comparison of Browser-Use, Browserless, and Browserbase for Web Scraping

5/2/25

This report compares three tools—Browser-Use, Browserless, and Browserbase—for the specific use case of web scraping hotel prices from Online Travel Agencies (OTAs) that require login authentication. The comparison is based on real user cases, user feedback, tech stack, login and authentication handling, pricing, scalability, performance, geographic locations, and documentation quality.

Real User Cases

Browser-Use

Browser-Use, an open-source Python library, enables AI agents to interact with web browsers for automation tasks. Example use cases from its GitHub repository include:

• Job Applications: Automating job searches and applications, likely requiring logins to job portals (GitHub Examples).
• Social Media Posting: Automating posts on X, which involves authentication (GitHub Examples).
• Web Navigation: Tasks like flight booking, suggesting capability to handle complex workflows with logins.

These examples indicate Browser-Use can manage authentication-heavy tasks, though specific implementations depend on user scripts.

Browserless

Browserless is a cloud-based service for running headless browsers, commonly used for web scraping and automation. Real-world applications include:

• Web Scraping: Users leverage Browserless for data extraction from JavaScript-heavy sites, with support for authentication workflows (Browserless Website).
• Automated Testing: Running end-to-end tests on web applications, often requiring login handling (Pipedream Integration).
• Scheduled Screenshots: Capturing website snapshots, which may involve authenticated pages (Pipedream Integration).

Browserless’s ability to handle remote interactions for authentication makes it suitable for OTA scraping.

Browserbase

Browserbase provides a serverless platform for managing headless browsers, tailored for AI-driven web automation. Notable use cases include:

• AI-Powered Sales Intelligence: Aomni used Browserbase to build a platform that likely involves scraping authenticated data (Browserbase Website).
• Website Optimization: Coframe utilized Browserbase for web interactions, possibly including logins (Browserbase Website).
• Web Scraping: Documentation highlights scraping tasks with authentication, supported by features like session persistence (Browserbase Documentation).

Browserbase’s focus on AI integration and authentication handling aligns well with the OTA scraping use case.

Real User Feedback

Browser-Use

Feedback on Browser-Use is limited but generally positive:

• Slashdot Review: A single verified review from Anton Z., a retired user, rates it 10/10 for gathering real-time information, though not specific to scraping (Slashdot Browser-Use).
• GitHub Popularity: With 25,000 stars on GitHub and 30 external contributors, Browser-Use has a growing community (Y Combinator Post).
• X Posts: Users praise new releases and compare Browser-Use to other tools, though one post claims a competitor is 1.8× faster (X Post by FellouAI).

The lack of extensive reviews suggests Browser-Use is niche but well-regarded among developers.

Browserless

User feedback on Browserless is mixed:

• Reddit Thread: A user appreciates its ease of use with AWS Lambdas but finds it expensive and notes the restrictive SSPL license for self-hosting (Reddit Webscraping). Alternatives like Scraping Fish were suggested.
• Community Engagement: Browserless is discussed in web scraping communities, indicating its relevance but also cost concerns.

While Browserless is valued for usability, pricing is a common criticism.

Browserbase

Feedback on Browserbase shows both promise and concerns:

• Slashdot Review: An anonymous founder rates it 1/10, citing unreliability, buggy playback, and poor support after account cancellation (Slashdot Browserbase).
• X Post: A user reports saving $160/month by switching from Browserless to Browserbase, suggesting cost-effectiveness (Browserbase Website).
• GitHub Activity: The Stagehand framework has 11,583 stars, indicating developer interest (GitHub Browserbase).

The negative review raises reliability concerns, but positive mentions suggest potential for specific use cases.

Tech Stack

• Browser-Use: Built in Python, it likely uses Playwright for automation, with dependencies like langchain_openai for AI integration and Gradio for UI (GitHub Browser-Use).
• Browserless: Supports Puppeteer and Playwright, running on a cloud infrastructure that manages browser instances (Browserless Website).
• Browserbase: Compatible with Puppeteer, Playwright, and Selenium, offering SDKs in Node.js and Python for seamless integration (Browserbase Documentation).

All tools leverage modern browser automation libraries, but Browser-Use requires self-hosting, while Browserless and Browserbase are managed services.

Login and Authentication Handling

Browser-Use

Browser-Use likely handles logins through Playwright scripts, which support:

• Session Management: Playwright’s browser contexts allow maintaining cookies and storage states for persistent logins (Playwright Documentation).
• Multiple Logins: Multi-tab management enables handling different OTAs in separate tabs or contexts (Browser-Use Website).
• Implementation: Users write scripts to navigate login pages, fill forms, and save session states, as seen in examples like Twitter posting (GitHub Examples).

While flexible, this approach requires manual scripting, which may be complex for non-technical users.

Browserless

Browserless supports login handling via Puppeteer and Playwright scripts:

• Remote Interactions: Enables authentication workflows, such as filling login forms remotely (Browserless Website).
• Session Persistence: Supports persistent caches and cookie management between sessions to bypass bot detectors (Subscribed.FYI).
• Implementation: Users write scripts to perform logins, with Browserless managing the browser infrastructure.

Browserless offers robust login capabilities but lacks specific features for 2FA or advanced authentication compared to Browserbase.

Browserbase

Browserbase provides comprehensive authentication handling:

• Session Persistence: Contexts allow reusing cookies and authentication states across sessions, reducing login frequency (Browserbase Contexts).
• Live View: Users can manually log in via a real-time interface, saving the context ID for future sessions (Browserbase Authentication).
• 2FA Handling: Strategies include disabling 2FA, using app passwords, or enabling remote control for human intervention (Browserbase Authentication).
• Passkeys and Cookies: Supports disabling passkeys via Chrome DevTools Protocol and reusing cookies to speed up logins (Browserbase Authentication).
• Stealth Mode: Uses proxies, fingerprinting, and captcha solving to handle IP restrictions and CAPTCHAs (Browserbase Authentication).

Browserbase’s dedicated features make it the most robust for handling OTA logins, especially for complex authentication scenarios.

Pricing

• Browser-Use: Free to use, but users bear costs for servers, proxies, and maintenance, which vary based on scale.
• Browserless: Offers a free tier and affordable paid plans. For 1,000 one-minute scrapes (2 units each), the Prototyping plan ($25/mo) supports 10,000 sessions, making it cost-effective for low-concurrency needs.
• Browserbase: The Startup plan ($99/mo) provides 500 browser hours, sufficient for 30,000 one-minute sessions, ideal for high-concurrency scraping but more expensive than Browserless.

For cost-conscious users, Browserless is attractive, while Browserbase suits those needing high concurrency.

Scalability

• Browser-Use: Scalability depends on user infrastructure. Deploying on cloud platforms like AWS or Google Cloud allows scaling, but requires technical expertise.
• Browserless: Scales from 1 concurrent browser (Free) to 50 (Scale) or thousands (Enterprise), with automatic resource management (Browserless Pricing).
• Browserbase: Supports up to 50 concurrent browsers (Startup) or 100+ (Scale), with serverless infrastructure for seamless scaling (Browserbase Website).

Browserbase and Browserless offer managed scalability, while Browser-Use requires custom solutions.

Performance

All tools use similar technologies (Playwright, Puppeteer), suggesting comparable performance for browser automation. Differences arise in:

• Browser-Use: Performance depends on hosting environment; high-performance servers can optimize speed.
• Browserless: Optimized for cloud execution, with features like residential proxies to reduce latency (Browserless Website).
• Browserbase: Emphasizes performance with caching and proxy support, though the negative review suggests potential reliability issues (Browserbase Contexts).

Without specific benchmarks, performance is assumed similar, but Browserbase’s reliability concerns warrant testing.

Geographic Locations

• Browser-Use: Location depends on user deployment, offering flexibility to choose cloud regions.
• Browserless: Servers in San Francisco, London, and Amsterdam, ensuring low-latency access in these regions (Browserless Pricing).
• Browserbase: Documentation mentions “Browser Regions,” but specific locations are not detailed; likely multiple regions for global access (Browserbase Documentation).

Browserless provides confirmed locations, while Browserbase’s regions require verification.

Documentation Quality

• Browser-Use: Documentation at docs.browser-use.com includes an introduction and quickstart, but lacks depth on authentication handling (Browser-Use Documentation).
• Browserless: Detailed documentation at docs.browserless.io covers endpoints and parameters, with clear integration guides (Browserless Documentation).
• Browserbase: Comprehensive documentation at docs.browserbase.com includes specific guides on authentication, web scraping, and performance, making it the most thorough (Browserbase Authentication).

Browserbase’s documentation stands out for its focus on authentication, critical for the OTA use case.

Conclusion

Browserbase is the recommended tool for web scraping hotel prices from OTAs due to its robust authentication features, including session persistence, Live View for manual logins, and 2FA strategies. However, a negative review highlights potential reliability issues, necessitating thorough testing. Browserless is a cost-effective alternative with strong automation support, suitable for lower-concurrency needs. Browser-Use offers flexibility for those comfortable managing infrastructure, but requires more setup effort.

For users prioritizing ease of use and authentication handling, Browserbase is ideal, provided reliability is verified. Budget-conscious users may prefer Browserless, while technical users can leverage Browser-Use’s open-source nature.