Skyvern vs Tines
A side-by-side comparison of Skyvern and Tines, two Automation tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Skyvern | Tines |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Automation | Automation |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License (differs) | Open core | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Hybrid | Hybrid |
| Platforms (differs) | Web, API, CLI | Web, API |
| Model support (differs) | BYO key / model | — |
| Vendor (differs) | Skyvern | Tines |
The honest brief
Skyvern
Drives sites with vision + LLMs instead of brittle selectors, so flows survive redesigns — and you can self-host the AGPL engine.
- Vision+LLM, no hand-written selectors
- Generalizes to unseen sites
- Self-hostable open-source core
- BYO model (OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, Ollama)
- AGPL-3.0 limits commercial reuse
- Vision approach can be slower/costlier
- Newer, smaller ecosystem
Tines
Security-first automation: deterministic 'stories' with AI agents layered on top, not a generic Zapier-style builder.
- Built for SOC/security incident response
- Deterministic workflows, AI optional
- Self-hosting on Business/Enterprise
- Generous free Community Edition
- Strong governance and audit controls
- Niche focus narrows general use
- Self-hosting gated to paid tiers
- Smaller app-connector library than Zapier
- Enterprise pricing is opaque