# BrowserAct vs Scrapingdog (slim)

> BrowserAct scores 44.4 (E) to Scrapingdog's 39.3 (E) for scraping. Prices, MCP, x402, uptime and agent notes side by side.

- Full: https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/browseract-vs-scrapingdog.md (~4,750 tokens) · this version ~2,130 tokens · JSON https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/browseract-vs-scrapingdog.json · canonical https://www.anchorterminal.com/compare/browseract-vs-scrapingdog
- Index: https://www.anchorterminal.com/llms.txt · API: https://www.anchorterminal.com/api/v1/index.json · MCP: https://www.anchorterminal.com/mcp · Updated: 2026-11-07
- Licence: CC BY 4.0, credit Anchor Terminal and link this page (https://www.anchorterminal.com/terms/#data)

BrowserAct scores 44.4 (E) on agent readiness against Scrapingdog's 39.3 (E), and leads in 4 of 7 scored categories. Scrapingdog leads on reliability, payments & pricing and transparency & trust. Both do scraping.

- BrowserAct: E 44.4, rank #1204 of 1486 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/browseract.min.md
- Scrapingdog: E 39.3, rank #1325 of 1486 · https://www.anchorterminal.com/tools/scrapingdog.min.md
- BrowserAct, good for Teams that want no-code, prompt-built scrapers an agent can rerun on a schedule. Ahead on Schema & documentation, 76 against 43; Agent ergonomics, 49 against 44; Security & auth, 41 against 5; Maintenance & community, 61 against 45.
- Scrapingdog, good for A budget agent that wants parsed Google, Amazon or LinkedIn results and can keep the key out of logs. Ahead on Reliability, 62 against 23; Payments & pricing, 40 against 25; Transparency & trust, 56 against 44. Also Runs on your own machine; Free to start without a card.

| Category | BrowserAct | Scrapingdog |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reliability (16%) | 23 | 62 |
| Performance (10%) | pending | pending |
| Schema & documentation (13%) | 76 | 43 |
| Agent ergonomics (13%) | 49 | 44 |
| Security & auth (14%) | 41 | 5 |
| Payments & pricing (10%) | 25 | 40 |
| Task success (10%) | pending | pending |
| Maintenance & community (7%) | 61 | 45 |
| Transparency & trust (7%) | 44 | 56 |

| Fact (where they differ) | BrowserAct | Scrapingdog |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Vendor | Hongkong Ziniao Technology Co., Limited | Scrapingdog (OpenData Labs) |
| Hosted endpoint | `https://mcp.browseract.com/mcp/` | `https://api.scrapingdog.com/scrape` |
| Transports | Streamable HTTP | HTTP, stdio |
| Tools exposed | none | 35 |
| MCP registry | not listed | `io.github.Darshan972/scrapingdog-mcp` |
| Last release | 2026-11-05 | 2026-07-31 |
| Terms last updated | 2025-05-15 | 2026-01-13 |
| Privacy policy last updated | 2025-05-15 | 2025-07-17 |
| Terms restrict automated access | yes | not found in the text |
| Popularity | none | 0 stars, 41 npm/wk, 12 PyPI/wk |
| Agent reviews | none | 3/5 (2) |

Why the edge:
- Reliability, Scrapingdog +39: BrowserAct 23 (Hosted reading. No status page found (0) and no readable incident history (5). The docs say there are no rate limits, and give concurrency by plan (2 free, up to 20 for paid API users) and a 7-hour task cap (8). No 429 or retry guidance, and no idempotency keys on task creation (0). No SLA (0). No beta label on the API or MCP server (10). 0 + 5 + 8 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 23.); Scrapingdog 62 (UptimeRobot status page linked from the footer per the 30 September check. It renders client-side and its data API is closed to our reader, so we couldn't see components today (15 of 20). No readable incident history (5). Concurrency per plan is published, 1 on Free up to 2,200 on the top plan (15). Over the limit returns 429, requests time out after 60 seconds, and the docs say to retry. Failures aren't billed. No Retry-After found (10 of 15). A public SLA page says Scrapingdog aims for 99 per cent monthly uptime and compensates downtime in credits, with no measurement method or date (7 of 10). Generally available (10).)
- Security & auth, BrowserAct +36: BrowserAct 41 (One account-wide API key type, revocable and listed with last-used time, but without scopes or expiry (18). Confirmation Required mode holds purchases and asset creation or deletion for approval in the BrowserAct page (14). Scraped pages are untrusted, and no prompt-injection guidance was found (3). Keys show last use and runs keep logs (6). No security page, disclosure policy, certification or bug bounty found (0). 18 + 14 + 3 + 6 + 0 = 41.); Scrapingdog 5 (One account key with no scopes, and we found no rotation or revocation docs (10). The key goes only in the api_key query string, with no header option, so less 10 (0 of 30). No read-only mode or least-privilege key. The API only reads third-party pages, so there are no destructive account actions (5 of 20). No prompt-injection guidance in the docs or the MCP README (0 of 15). No request log or per-call audit found (0 of 15). No security.txt per the 30 September check, and no disclosure policy, bug bounty or certification found (0 of 20).)
- Schema & documentation, BrowserAct +33: BrowserAct 76 (An OpenAPI 3.0.3 document behind the API reference (25). llms.txt on both the site and the docs, with Markdown pages (10). Endpoint descriptions explain the run flow (find a bot, read its input_schema, then run) and when to use the lighter status endpoint (14). Inputs are typed, but a run's input is an object shaped by each bot's own schema (10). Examples per endpoint and named error codes such as 10879 and 10127; no full error table found (10). The path carries v3, but no changelog was found (7). 25 + 10 + 14 + 10 + 10 + 7 = 76.); Scrapingdog 43 (No OpenAPI spec found. The MCP builds typed zod inputs for 35 tools from a declarative registry, and ai_extract_rules is a JSON string (12 of 25). llms.txt per the 30 September check (10). MCP descriptions say what each endpoint does but not when to avoid it, and the web_scrape tool tells the model the API default for dynamic is false while the docs say rendering is on by default (10 of 20). Booleans, numbers and strings with few enums, plus the JSON-string field (9 of 15). Code examples on each docs page and 8 documented status codes (12 of 15). No changelog and no versioned API paths found (0).)
- Maintenance & community, BrowserAct +16: BrowserAct 61 (browser-act-cli 1.6.2 on 5 November 2026, read from PyPI's release feed (30). Six CLI releases from 15 October to 5 November (20). A closed service with a support address, but no public changelog or issue tracker found (8). No official SDKs and no entry in the official MCP registry (0). The CLI package carries no licence or repository in its metadata (3). 30 + 20 + 8 + 0 + 3 = 61.); Scrapingdog 45 (The SDKs and MCP server were first published on 31 July and 1 August 2026, 61 days ago. No API changelog or later release found (20). Three packages and two MCP versions shipped on launch day and nothing since, so we gave half (10 of 20). We couldn't read GitHub issues. The MCP repo has 6 commits, all on 1 August, and support is by chat and email (5 of 25). The MCP is in the official registry under the personal namespace io.github.Darshan972, though the vendor's SDK page links it as its own. SDKs are current (8 of 15). No CI, tests or tags in the MCP repo (2 of 10).)
- Payments & pricing, Scrapingdog +15: BrowserAct 25 (No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Plan prices and credit costs per bot build, run and workflow step are public, but there is no direct per-call price (15). A free plan with 200 credits; whether it needs a card isn't stated (10). A person signs up and creates the key in the dashboard (0). 0 + 15 + 10 + 0 = 25.); Scrapingdog 40 (No x402, MPP or L402 (0). Credit costs per API and plan prices are public, from 1 credit for a rotating-proxy request to 50 for a LinkedIn profile (20). Free plan of 100 credits and 1 concurrent request, no card. The docs say 200 requests a month (20). A person signs up in a browser (0).)
- Transparency & trust, Scrapingdog +12: BrowserAct 44 (Closed service with published terms naming the operating company and governing law (15). The privacy policy of 15 May 2025 states retention by category and that crawled data is kept per plan and deletable by the user (15). No deprecation policy or notices found (0). No sub-processors or data locations named (3). 15 + 15 + 0 + 3 = 33.); Scrapingdog 56 (Closed service with terms revised 13 January 2026, naming OpenData Labs Private Limited under the laws of Rajasthan, India, with no postal address. The MCP is MIT (15 of 30). The privacy policy, revised 17 July 2025, says API calls are stateless and that Scrapingdog doesn't store, log or retain personal data fetched through the API. A DPA is published. No retention periods for account data (22 of 30). No deprecation policy or dated notices found (0). No processors or data locations named (0 of 20).)