Registry › Compare › BrowserOS vs OpenClaw

BrowserOS vs OpenClaw

OpenClaw leads on trust: 91.3/100 (Grade A) against 66.5/100 (Grade B), a 24.8-point gap. OpenClaw leads on supply-chain integrity and adoption, and rests on broader evidence.

B BrowserOS 66.5

🌐 The open-source Agentic browser; alternative to ChatGPT Atlas, Perplexity Comet, Dia.

browseros-ai/BrowserOS · #477 overall · #14 Browser & Computer Use · coverage C (2/5)

BrowserOS doesn't lead on any scored dimension in this pair.

A OpenClaw 91.3

The AI that really does things. Any OS. Any Platform. The lobster way. 🦞

openclaw/openclaw · #15 overall · #2 Browser & Computer Use · coverage A (4/5)

Choose OpenClaw if supply-chain integrity and adoption matter most.

+10.0Adoption: 394.3k GitHub stars against 14.3k
+8.9Safety / Integrity: 100% of recent commits signed, against 99%
+7.2Identity / Provenance: package provenance attested, against none
+0.9Transparency: OSSF Scorecard 6.1 against 5.0

Where they differ

11.2

Safety / IntegrityOpenClaw +8.9

20.1

10.8

Identity / ProvenanceOpenClaw +7.2

18.0

12.8

TransparencyOpenClaw +0.9

13.7

10.0

AdoptionOpenClaw +10.0

20.0

+1.7

Runtime calibrationBrowserOS +2.2

-0.5

1 dimension identical: Maintenance 20.0 · Full evidence table

An independent, evidence-based trust comparison of BrowserOS and OpenClaw, 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	BrowserOSbrowseros-ai/BrowserOS	OpenClawopenclaw/openclaw
HVTrust score	66.5	91.3
Evidence grade	B	A
Coverage grade	C	A
Overall rank	#477	#15
Rank in Browser & Computer Use	#14	#2
GitHub stars	14.3k	394.3k
Last updated	today	today
Build provenance	No	Yes
OSSF Scorecard	5.0 / 10	6.1 / 10
License	AGPL-3.0	MIT
Downloads	—	2.8M/wk
Trust dimensions (points earned)
Safety / integrity / 25	11.2	20.1
Identity & provenance / 18	10.8	18.0
Transparency / 17	12.8	13.7
Maintenance / 20	20.0	20.0
Adoption / 20	10.0	20.0
Runtime capability surface (full matrix)
MCP server	Implemented	Implemented
External providers	1 — Amazon Bedrock	4 — Anthropic, Google Gemini, OpenAI, …
Requires API keys	No	No
Plugin surface	plugins	extensions
Provenance drift	—	Match

Open in the live compare tool → BrowserOS profile OpenClaw 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 →