Registry › Compare › Browser Harness vs Stagehand

Browser Harness vs Stagehand

Both are Grade A and 1.2 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Browser Harness leads on transparency; Stagehand leads on supply-chain integrity and rests on broader evidence. Note: Browser Harness's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.

A Browser Harness 90.2

Browser Harness | Self-healing harness that enables LLMs to complete any task.

browser-use/browser-harness · #22 overall · #3 Browser & Computer Use · coverage B (3/5)

Choose Browser Harness if transparency matters most.

+0.7Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 5.9 against 5.0

A Stagehand 89.0

The SDK to extract data and interact with any site on the web. Get started with Claude Code, Codex, Eve, Mastra, and more.

browserbase/stagehand · #38 overall · #6 Browser & Computer Use · coverage A (4/5)

Choose Stagehand if supply-chain integrity matters most.

+2.4Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 31%
A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3

Where they differ

16.4

Safety / IntegrityStagehand +2.4

18.8

13.5

TransparencyBrowser Harness +0.7

12.8

20.0

MaintenanceBrowser Harness +0.1

19.9

18.5

AdoptionStagehand +0.4

18.9

+3.8

Runtime calibrationBrowser Harness +3.2

+0.6

1 dimension identical: Identity 18.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Browser Harness and Stagehand, two Browser & Computer Use projects in the HVTracker registry. Scores come from public, checkable signals — supply-chain provenance, OSSF Scorecard, maintenance, and adoption — not popularity.

Full evidence

Signal	Browser Harnessbrowser-use/browser-harness	Stagehandbrowserbase/stagehand
HVTrust score	90.2	89.0
Evidence grade	A	A
Coverage grade	B	A
Overall rank	#22	#38
Rank in Browser & Computer Use	#3	#6
GitHub stars	18.4k	25.7k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	Yes	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	5.9 / 10	5.0 / 10
License	MIT	MIT
Downloads	1.5M/wk	1.7M/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	16.4	18.8
Identity & provenance / 18	18.0	18.0
Transparency / 17	13.5	12.8
Maintenance / 20	20.0	19.9
Adoption / 20	18.5	18.9
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	1 — Anthropic	3 — Anthropic, Browserbase, OpenAI
Requires API keys	No	Yes
Plugin surface	plugins	extensions
Provenance drift	Match	Match

Open in the live compare tool → Browser Harness profile Stagehand profile More Browser & Computer Use →

How to read this: HVTrust (0–100) weighs supply-chain signals (provenance, OSSF Scorecard, signed commits, open license) alongside real-world adoption, scaled by an evidence-confidence factor. Grade bands: A ≥ 80, B ≥ 65, C ≥ 50, D < 50. Signals refresh daily. Full methodology v4.4 →