Automa vs Skyvern
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted automation & workflows options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
| Feature | Automa | Skyvern |
|---|---|---|
| Deploy effort | Read-the-docs project | Under-an-hour setup |
| Health score | 70 · Good | 96 · Excellent |
| Category | Automation & Workflows | Automation & Workflows |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Language | Vue | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 4,096 MB |
| Deployment | source | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 21,640 | ★ 23,058 |
| First released | 2021 | 2024 |
| Replaces | Zapier, UiPath | UiPath, Zapier |
What are Automa and Skyvern?
Automa
Automa is an open-source browser extension that automates repetitive web tasks using a visual block-based workflow builder. Workflows run locally in the browser and can be scheduled or triggered.
- Visual workflow builder
- Browser task automation
- Scheduling and triggers
- Runs locally
Skyvern
Skyvern automates browser-based workflows by combining large language models with computer vision, allowing it to operate on websites it has never seen before. It runs as a self-hosted service with an API.
- LLM-driven browser automation
- Works on unseen sites
- Vision-based interaction
- Workflow API
Automa vs Skyvern: key differences
Automa is written in Vue, while Skyvern is built with Python. Licensing differs — MIT for Automa versus AGPL-3.0 for Skyvern. Automa is the lighter option, starting around 256 MB of RAM against 4,096 MB for Skyvern. Automa is the more established project (first released 2021), while Skyvern arrived in 2024. Skyvern lists first-class Docker deployment; Automa does not.
Why pick each one
Choose Automa if…
- Visual block builder
- Runs entirely locally
- Scheduling and triggers
Watch out for
- Browser extension only
- Complex flows get fiddly
Choose Skyvern if…
- Handles unseen websites
- Vision-based automation
- API-first design
Watch out for
- LLM costs add up
- Postgres required
Frequently asked questions
Is Automa or Skyvern better?
Neither is universally better. Skyvern has the larger community, while Automa is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Automa and Skyvern free and open-source?
Yes. Automa is licensed under MIT and Skyvern under AGPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Automa and Skyvern with Docker?
Automa: check the project docs for container support. Skyvern: yes.
Which is lighter on resources, Automa or Skyvern?
Automa has the smaller minimum footprint at 256 MB of RAM, compared to about 4,096 MB for Skyvern. Real-world usage depends on library size, user count, and enabled features.