Best Airbnb Scrapers: Bright Data, Apify & Oxylabs
We tested six web scraping providers on Airbnb, sending a total of 1,500 scrape requests across all providers. Each provider was given the same set of vacation rental listing URLs and measured on completion time, success rate, and available metadata fields per listing.
Airbnb scraping benchmark
You can read our benchmark methodology for more details on our testing process.
Domain coverage per provider
- ✅ = supported, returns HTML
- ✅ ✅ = supported, returns structured data
Available metadata fields by provider
Only Bright Data and Apify returned structured JSON, making them the only providers with measurable metadata fields.
Scraping Airbnb benchmark results
Bright Data matched the highest success rate on Airbnb at 99%, and returned the most metadata of any provider, with 48 structured fields per listing. The depth of data covered host details, pricing breakdowns, cancellation policies, and review summaries that other providers did not include.
Oxylabs achieved a 98% success rate on Airbnb. The result was steady throughout the test, with no notable drops. It did not lead on data richness, but it delivered dependable extraction on a domain where some providers struggled.
Decodo reached a 93% success rate on Airbnb using a general-purpose scraping configuration rather than an Airbnb-specific setup. The success rate was lower than the top group, but it remained usable across the majority of the test URLs.
Apify also reached a 99% success rate on Airbnb and was one of two providers returning structured JSON, delivering 36 metadata fields per listing.
Zyte posted a 98% success rate on Airbnb. While it returned HTML rather than structured data, results were consistent across the full URL set. It was one of the more reliable options on this domain.
Nimble recorded a 12% success rate on Airbnb, which was significantly below the rest of the field. The low success rate indicates that Nimble’s rendering engine was unable to handle Airbnb’s page structure for most of the tested URLs. This was the only provider in the benchmark where Airbnb presented a major extraction challenge.
Benchmark methodology
We tested six web scraping providers (Apify, Bright Data, Decodo, Oxylabs, Nimble, Zyte) on airbnb.com.
Dataset
We prepared 250 product page URLs from Airbnb. Product pages are individual property listings with details like title, price, rating, reviews, and host information.
All URLs included check_in, check_out, and adults query parameters to ensure price data was rendered on the page. Non-standard subdomains (e.g., es.airbnb.com, hr.airbnb.com) were corrected to www.airbnb.com during dataset preparation. All URLs were verified as accessible before the benchmark.
Shared configuration
All providers received identical URLs from the same dataset and were tested under the same conditions:
- Sequential execution: one request at a time, no parallel requests
- Delay between requests: 2 seconds
- Rate limit handling: 30-second wait with up to 3 retries on HTTP 429
- Submission timeout: 300 seconds
- Execution timeout: 600 seconds
- Each URL was tested once per provider
Provider configurations
Apify
Apify used the tri_angle/airbnb-rooms-urls-scraper actor, which returns structured JSON with parsed fields. No CSS selector parsing was needed. Actor runs were polled at 1-second intervals until status reached SUCCEEDED.
Bright Data
Bright Data used the Dataset API (dataset_id: gd_ld7ll037kqy322v05), which returns structured JSON with parsed fields. The Dataset API was polled using the /progress/{snapshot_id} endpoint at 1-second intervals until status reached ready. Results were then fetched from the /snapshot/{snapshot_id} endpoint.
Decodo (Smartproxy)
Decodo used the Universal Scraper API (target: universal, headless: html), which returns JavaScript-rendered HTML. The response was parsed locally with CSS selectors. All requests included a desktop User-Agent header.
Oxylabs
Oxylabs used the Realtime API with source: airbnb and render: html, which returns JavaScript-rendered HTML. The response was parsed locally with CSS selectors.
Nimbleway
Nimble used the Extract API with render: true and driver: vx10 (stealth headless browser). The response was parsed locally with CSS selectors. No domain-specific configuration was applied.
Zyte
Zyte used the Extract API with browserHtml: true, which returns JavaScript-rendered HTML via a headless Chromium browser. The response was parsed locally with CSS selectors. No domain-specific configuration was applied.
Validation
HTTP status check
Before validation, the provider’s HTTP response code is checked first. Responses with status codes between 200-399 and 404 are considered successful submissions and proceed to the validation phase. Any other status code (400, 403, 500, 550, etc.) is treated as a failed submission, and the test is immediately marked as failed without entering the validation phase.
Validation rules
Tests that pass the HTTP status check are validated in the following order:
- 404 detection: If the page content or API error indicates the page no longer exists (“page not found”, “does not exist”, “dead_page”), the test is marked as valid. The provider correctly identified an unavailable page.
- Data extraction (JSON API): For providers returning structured JSON, at least one data field must be present and non-empty, with a valid type depending on the field (string or integer). Fields checked include title, price, rating, and reviews.
- Data extraction (HTML): For providers returning HTML, the response is parsed with Airbnb-specific CSS selectors. If at least one selector matches and returns a non-empty value, the test passes.
- Page indicator (HTML only): If no data items were extracted but at least one of the predefined CSS selectors for Airbnb matched an element on the page, the test is marked as valid. This confirms the page was rendered and loaded, even if no structured data items were found in the expected containers. If none of the above conditions are met, the test fails. Common failure reasons include captcha/bot challenge pages, insufficient JavaScript rendering, proxy connection errors, and crawler errors.
Metrics
Validation success rate: The percentage of tested URLs where the provider returned usable data, calculated as successful tests divided by total tests.
Completion time: The total time from sending the scrape request to receiving validated results, measured in seconds. For async providers, job completion status was polled at 1-second intervals. Reported as the arithmetic mean across all runs in a group.
Available metadata: The number of unique field names returned by the provider across all items in a response. Only applicable to JSON API responses.
FAQs for Airbnb scraping
Depending on the provider, scraped Airbnb data can include listing title, price per night, location, property type, number of bedrooms and bathrooms, host details, guest capacity, amenities, review scores, check-in/check-out rules, cancellation policies, and availability calendars. Providers returning structured JSON typically deliver more fields than HTML-based extraction.
Yes, most providers can extract overall ratings and individual review data from Airbnb listing pages. Some structured APIs return review text, reviewer name, date, and category ratings (cleanliness, communication, etc.) as separate fields. HTML-based providers return whatever reviews are rendered on the page.
Yes, Airbnb uses the same URL structure globally. Listings from any country can be scraped using the same provider configuration. Ensure URLs use the www.airbnb.com domain rather than localized subdomains (e.g., es.airbnb.com or ar.airbnb.com), as some providers do not resolve regional subdomains correctly.
The main challenges are dynamic JavaScript rendering, anti-bot detection, and incomplete data from missing URL parameters. Using providers with headless browser rendering or dedicated Airbnb APIs addresses the first two. For complete pricing data, always include check_in, check_out, and adults parameters in listing URLs. In our benchmark, one provider recorded a 12% success rate due to rendering failures, while others using dedicated configurations exceeded 93%.
Be the first to comment
Your email address will not be published. All fields are required.