CocoShot alternative: Screencappy

Last verified: August 15, 2026

CocoShot is free, needs no account, and says it processes everything in your browser. On price and privacy posture it is the closest thing to Screencappy in this category, and it is well liked.

The differences are narrower than on any other page here: Screencappy is open source under Apache-2.0 and requests no host permissions, and CocoShot is closed source with a Pro tier announced but not yet priced.

What does CocoShot do well?

Quite a lot, and its users agree. It holds a 4.9 rating from 724 ratings on the Chrome Web Store today, which is the highest rating in this comparison.

Reviewers consistently praise fast, accurate whole page capture, including on pages with fixed widgets, and its export range is unusually wide: PNG and JPEG, PDF, Markdown, self contained HTML, and video formats. Annotation is included at no cost. If you are using it happily, there is no urgent reason to switch.

Its review record supports that. Across roughly 210 reviews sampled from December 2022 to August 2026, only six were rated three stars or below, and no complaint recurs often enough to count as a theme.

Is CocoShot free?

Today, yes. Its FAQ states it is completely free with no hidden fees and that all features are available at no cost.

A CocoShot Pro tier is announced on the vendor's site as coming soon, with a waitlist and no published price. Its announced feature list includes advanced annotation tools and smart blur, which are free in the current version. Whether that boundary moves is not something either of us can tell you yet.

Is CocoShot open source?

No. The Terms state the service and its functionality are the exclusive property of the developer, and there is no public source repository.

That is the clearest difference between the two tools. Screencappy's source is public under Apache-2.0, so the code that runs against your pages can be read, audited, forked, or built yourself. With a closed extension, a privacy claim is a promise. With an open one, it is checkable.

Does CocoShot upload my screenshots?

The vendor states it does not, and its store listing carries the "will not collect or use your data" disclosure. We have no evidence to the contrary and we are not suggesting any.

Two things to know so the comparison is complete. Its shipped package requests optional access to all sites and to local files, which Screencappy does not request at all. And its announced Pro tier includes cloud sync, so the local only shape of the product is described by the vendor as changing.

How do CocoShot and Screencappy compare?

Which one should you use?

If you want one extension that does screenshots and screen recording and exports to Markdown or a self contained HTML file, CocoShot covers more ground and does it well.

If it matters to you that the code is public, that no extension holds standing access to your pages, and that the free features cannot be moved behind a tier later without you being able to see it happen, that is the case for Screencappy. Both are free today. Only one of them can be checked.

To state Screencappy's own side plainly, since this page turns on permissions: it requests no host permissions, and it does declare Chrome's debugger permission at install, because Chrome does not allow that one to be requested later. That permission powers the Turbo capture engine, searchable PDF export and mobile width capture. It is only active while one of those captures is running, and Chrome shows a visible banner the whole time it is in use. The row above compares host permissions, which is the separate question of whether an extension can read your pages without being asked.

CocoShot is a trademark of its respective owner. Screencappy is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or connected to CocoShot in any way.