Last updated: August 2026. Every claim on this page links to a published source: Anchor's documentation, or Skyvern's own site, pricing, and comparison pages. Pricing and plan details reflect each company's published pages as of this date.

Anchor Browser and Skyvern both exist because AI agents and automations need a browser that can log in somewhere and get work done. They approach the problem from different directions. Skyvern is a vision-based task automation platform: you describe a workflow, its AI agent reads pages visually and executes, and successful runs compile into repeatable code. Anchor is managed browser infrastructure built around agents that have to sign in and stay signed in: persistent identities, managed re-authentication, credential isolation from the model, and a published compliance envelope, with both natural-language task execution and full programmatic control on top.

Skyvern publishes its own comparison of the two platforms. Parts of it describe capabilities Anchor documents publicly, so this page does two jobs: it lays out the real differences with sources, and it corrects the record where the published claims and Anchor's documentation disagree. Every vendor's comparison page, this one included, is written by an interested party. The primary documentation both sides link to is the evidence that matters.

Where Skyvern is strong

An honest comparison starts here.

• Open source with a large community. Skyvern's codebase is public on GitHub with over 22,000 stars and can be self-hosted via Docker. For teams that want to read the code or run it themselves, that is a real advantage.

• No-code workflow building. Skyvern offers multiple ways to build automations without engineering time: a copilot chat, SOP uploads, browser recording, and a visual builder, alongside Python and TypeScript SDKs. Organizations without dedicated developers can contribute workflows.

• Vision-based adaptation. Skyvern's agent re-reads pages visually at runtime, so workflows can survive layout changes without manual selector fixes, and it compiles successful runs into Playwright code so repeated workflows get faster.

• Low entry price for task automation. Skyvern's published plans start free (5,000 credits) and scale through Hobby at $29/month and Pro at $149/month (Skyvern pricing).

Correcting the record

Skyvern's comparison page (June 2026 version, as of this writing) makes three claims about Anchor that its published documentation contradicts.

Claim: "No built-in credential vault; secret management falls on the user, typically outside the platform."

Anchor's identity layer stores credentials natively. An identity is a stored account on an application: it holds credentials and validated session state, and Anchor authenticates with it before your agent or automation runs, re-authenticating automatically when the saved state expires (managed authentication). For teams that prefer credentials to live in their existing vault, secrets, including TOTP codes, resolve directly from 1Password at session creation. And secret values keep sensitive data away from the model entirely: real values are never visible to the AI model, are processed in memory and never persisted, are excluded from all logs and telemetry, and can be scoped to specific domains so a credential is only available on the site it belongs to.

Claim: "No native support for TOTP-based MFA, meaning workflows that hit multi-factor authentication prompts require custom handling code."

Multi-factor authentication is a documented, built-in part of Anchor's authentication stack. Identities support TOTP authenticator flows among their built-in credential methods, which include email OTP, TOTP, 1Password, and custom MFA. Email one-time passcodes work through a dedicated mailbox per identity, consumed automatically during identity creation, re-authentication, and live sessions. For codes that must come from an external system mid-run, event coordination lets your backend inject them without stopping the task. No custom handling code is required for any of these paths.

Claim: Anchor pricing is "$0.01 per session plus $0.0005 per second of session time."

The per-second figure does not appear on Anchor's published rate card. Anchor's pricing page lists $0.01 per browser created and $0.05 per browser hour, with proxy data and AI steps metered separately. The full model is in the pricing section below.

Skyvern's page also frames Anchor as infrastructure "where you write and maintain scripts using code." Anchor supports full programmatic control, and it also runs natural-language agent tasks: the agentTask method takes a plain-English prompt and completes the task without the whole flow being coded.

Authentication that survives across agent runs

For production automation on real accounts, the authentication layer is the biggest architectural difference between the platforms.

Anchor treats login state as a managed primitive. Profiles persist cookies, local storage, and cache beyond a single session. Identities sit above profiles: store credentials once, attach the identity when creating a session, and the browser starts signed in, with Anchor re-authenticating when needed. If your product's end users need to connect their own accounts, OmniConnect's hosted flow lets them sign in on Anchor's UI and hands your application back an identity ID, so your app never touches their credentials. Anchor's security documentation also states customers are never required to store credentials on the platform; session-based authentication is available when you want credentials to exist only at runtime.

Skyvern publishes its own credential capabilities: an encrypted credential vault with TOTP support, plus 1Password and Azure Key Vault integrations. Per its pricing page, 2FA/TOTP support is listed at the Pro tier and above, and the vault integrations at higher plans. Teams evaluating both should read each vendor's credential documentation directly against their security team's checklist: where credentials are stored, what the model can see, and what happens when a login goes stale mid-run.

Pricing: metered infrastructure vs. credit plans

The two companies meter differently, so the comparison is about model shape rather than a single per-unit rate.

Skyvern prices on monthly credit allotments, per its pricing page: Free ($0, 5,000 credits, 1 concurrent run), Hobby ($29/month, 30,000 credits, 10 concurrent runs), Pro ($149/month, 150,000 credits, 25 concurrent runs), and Enterprise (custom credits, 100 concurrent runs, HIPAA compliance, dedicated support).

Anchor prices each metered resource separately, from its pricing page: $0.05 per browser hour, $0.01 per browser creation, $8 per GB of Anchor proxy data ($0.20 per GB with your own proxy), and AI steps at $0.01 to $0.10 per step by model tier (a flat $0.01 per step with your own API key), on top of a plan fee (Free with $5 in monthly credits; Starter $50/month; Growth $2,000/month; Enterprise custom). Published concurrency runs 5, 25, 200, and 500+ across those tiers.

The practical read: Skyvern's credit plans are simple to start with and fit task-shaped workloads. Anchor's per-resource meters make browser hours, proxy data, and AI steps each legible as a separate line, which is easier to reason about when one dimension dominates your bill, and AI-step charges apply only when Anchor's hosted models drive the browser. The two meters are not denominated in the same units, so model your own workload against both pricing pages rather than relying on a single multiplier.

Deployment and compliance

Anchor's managed service runs with per-session isolation and a published compliance posture: SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001, and GDPR from the Growth plan, with EU data residency in Frankfurt available on Growth, and BAA, HIPAA, DPA, SSO, and RBAC at Enterprise (pricing, security). For teams whose security model requires browsers inside their own boundary, Enterprise offers bring-your-own-cloud and on-premise deployment. ZDR mode disables all video and log recording, and sensitive data masking is automatic for passwords and emails.

Skyvern can be self-hosted from its open-source codebase via Docker, and its Enterprise plan lists HIPAA compliance (pricing). For compliance requirements beyond what either company publishes, confirm directly with the vendor during procurement.

When each is the right choice

Choose Skyvern when the job is task automation built by non-developers, when open source is a requirement, or when a credit-based plan at a low entry price fits the workload. Its visual agent and workflow builders are designed for exactly that.

Choose Anchor when agents or automations operate real authenticated accounts in production: when logins must persist and recover across separate runs, when credentials must stay out of the model and out of logs, when MFA (TOTP, email OTP, or externally coordinated codes) is in the login path, when end users connect their own accounts through your product, or when procurement requires a published compliance envelope with BYOC or on-premise deployment as an option.

Related comparisons: Anchor Browser vs. Browserless, Anchor Browser vs. Browserbase, Anchor Browser vs. Steel. Anchor's credential and data-handling posture in full: Anchor Browser security posture.