Browser Use vs Cua
Both are Grade B and 4.6 points apart, so choose on what you weigh most. Browser Use leads on adoption and rests on broader evidence; Cua leads on supply-chain integrity and transparency. Note: Cua's evidence coverage is thinner (coverage B vs A) — its score rests on fewer independent signal types.
Open-source Python library for AI browser agents, plus Browser Use Cloud: stealth browsers and a hosted agent API.
Choose Browser Use if adoption matters most.
- +4.4Adoption: 1.5M weekly downloads against 3.8k
- A vs BEvidence coverage: 4 of 5 independent signal types, against 3
Scale computer-use 2.0 with open-source drivers, cross-OS sandboxes, and benchmarks for training, evaluation, and data generation.
Choose Cua if supply-chain integrity and transparency matter most.
- +4.1Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 47%
- +1.0Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.1 against 4.9
Where they differ
2 dimensions identical: Identity 10.8 · Maintenance 19.9 · Full evidence table
An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of Browser Use and Cua, 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 Usebrowser-use/browser-use | Cuatrycua/cua |
|---|---|---|
| HVTrust score | 72.9 | 77.5 |
| Evidence grade | B | B |
| Coverage grade | A | B |
| Overall rank | #300 | #220 |
| Rank in Browser & Computer Use | #13 | #9 |
| GitHub stars | 119.9k | 31.6k |
| Last updated | 1d ago | 1d ago |
| Build provenance | No | No |
| OSSF Scorecard | 4.9 / 10 | 6.1 / 10 |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Downloads | 1.5M/wk | 4k/wk |
| Trust dimensions (points earned) | ||
| Safety / integrity / 25 | 8.5 | 12.6 |
| Identity & provenance / 18 | 10.8 | 10.8 |
| Transparency / 17 | 12.7 | 13.7 |
| Maintenance / 20 | 19.9 | 19.9 |
| Adoption / 20 | 20.0 | 15.6 |
| Runtime capability surface (full matrix) | ||
| MCP server | Declared | Implemented |
| External providers | 5 — Amazon Bedrock, Anthropic, Google Gemini, … | 2 — Anthropic, OpenAI |
| Requires API keys | Yes | No |
| Plugin surface | — | plugins |
| Provenance drift | Match | Match |
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 →