Updated September 28, 2026 · AffCue Editorial Team

Ghost Browser vs Oxylabs

Ghost Browser scores 8.9 and Oxylabs 9.2 out of 10. Compare their differences and shared features below.

Ghost Browser

Facts checked September 26, 2026.

Oxylabs

Facts checked September 26, 2026.

What sets them apart

Ghost Browser vs Oxylabs
Compare
Ghost BrowserGhost Browser
ReviewSee alternativesSee alternatives
OxylabsOxylabs
ReviewSee alternativesSee alternatives
Commission terms20% recurring lifetime commissions50% per sale up to $2000
Recurring commissionYesHas itNo
Payout threshold$100$25Lower
Payout frequencyMonthlymonthly
Commission (%)20%50%Higher
VerticalsSecuritySecurity, HostingCovers more
Cookie window30 daysNot confirmed
NetworksNot confirmedHasOffers (TUNE)
Payout methodsPayPalNot confirmed
Payout per sale or signupNot confirmed$2,000

We earn a commission when you sign up through links on this site. Partner status can affect where a brand appears in our rankings.

Key differences

  • Recurring commission: only Ghost Browser.
  • Payout threshold is lower at Oxylabs: $25 vs $100.
  • Commission (%) is higher at Oxylabs: 50% vs 20%.
  • Support channels: only Ghost Browser offers Help centre.
  • Support channels: only Oxylabs offers Email.
  • Pricing model: only Ghost Browser offers CPS, Recurring.
  • Pricing model: only Oxylabs offers CPA.
  • Verticals: only Oxylabs offers Hosting.

Our verdict on each

Ghost Browser

Ghost Browser pays 20% recurring for life on a 30 cookie, a rate that rewards publishers already selling privacy tooling rather than those chasing the biggest per-sale number. It suits less well anyone after fast payouts, because the bar sits at $100 and clearing it takes time.

Read the full Ghost Browser review

Oxylabs

Oxylabs suits publishers who can land a few high value buyers rather than a long tail of small accounts. The programme pays 50% per sale up to $2000 on a cpa model, so a single conversion carries the month and lead volume is not the lever that matters here.

Read the full Oxylabs review

Earnings on 10 sales of 100

Ghost Browser

200

20% of 1,000

Oxylabs

500

50% of 1,000

Oxylabs comes out 300 higher in this example.

Worked out from the stated prices and rates; your own total depends on how you use it. Facts checked September 26, 2026.

What each covers

Ghost Browser vs Oxylabs
Pricing modelGhost BrowserOxylabs
CPANoYes
CPSYesNo
RecurringYesNo

How they place

Ghost Browser vs Oxylabs
RankingGhost BrowserOxylabs
Software and SaaS programs22 of 4011 of 40
Security, VPN and proxy programs5 of 102 of 10

Availability and regulation

Ghost Browser vs Oxylabs
CountryGhost BrowserOxylabs
RegionGlobalGlobal

Sources behind this comparison

Ghost Browser

  • ghostbrowser.com: 14 facts, checked September 26, 2026

Oxylabs

  • oxylabs.io: 10 facts, checked September 26, 2026
  • oxylabs.hasoffers.com: 3 facts, checked September 26, 2026

Every fact side by side

Ghost Browser vs Oxylabs
FactGhost BrowserOxylabs
Pricing modelCPS, RecurringCPA
FeaturesDirectDirect
RegionGlobalGlobal
Legal entityWebatix, IncNot confirmed
HeadquartersUnited StatesNot confirmed
FoundedNot confirmed2015
Support channelsHelp centreEmail

Where each stands against the rest

Ghost Browser vs Oxylabs
FactGhost BrowserOxylabsMedian
Cookie window30 daysat the medianNot confirmed30
Payout threshold$100highest quarter$25below the median$50
Commission (%)20%above the median50%highest quarter12
Payout per sale or signupNot confirmed$2,000highest quarter$160

Median across 167 listed affiliate programs.

Pros and cons

Ghost Browser

Pros

  • Recurring commission is part of the deal, so a single referral keeps paying for as long as the customer stays subscribed.
  • 20% on every referred sale, a flat rate that applies to each conversion.
  • A 30 cookie matches the 30 median window across programmes on the site, so attribution behaves predictably.

Cons

  • Payouts wait for $100, which sits above the €43.85 median threshold across programmes on the site.
  • PayPal is the only method listed, and bank transfer is not among its payout methods, so withdrawal options are narrow.
  • 20% sits below the 25% to 35% recurring for 12 months offered by FirstPromoter and the 25-30% recurring for 12 months offered by Jasper.

Oxylabs

Pros

  • Terms of 50% per sale up to $2000 put a hard ceiling on a sale, so a small number of conversions can carry a full cycle.
  • A cpa payout at 50% is easier to model than Up to 100% first-year sales from the monday affiliate programme.
  • The programme runs on HasOffers (TUNE), so tracking and payouts sit with a network publishers already use.

Cons

  • Recurring commission is no, so a sale pays once: 25-30% recurring for 12 months at Jasper and 25% to 35% recurring for 12 months at FirstPromoter keep paying on the same account.
  • Support runs on email only, so tracking questions travel by email between campaigns.
  • Commission under the $25 threshold waits for a cycle to close, so cash flow matters more here than on a lower bar programme.

Who each suits

Ghost Browser

Who it suits

  • Publishers with an existing audience for anti-detect browsers, privacy research and multi-account workflows, where renewals matter more than a single payout.
  • Security and research reviewers who can explain the product in depth to a niche audience, since 20% needs referral volume to add up.
  • Publishers who prefer dealing straight with the brand, since the programme runs as a direct arrangement rather than through a network.

Who should look elsewhere

  • Publishers chasing a quick first payout, since the $100 threshold and a monthly cycle mean a longer wait.
  • Anyone wanting a larger share per sale, since FirstPromoter pays 25% to 35% recurring for 12 months and Jasper pays 25-30% recurring for 12 months.
  • Publishers paid by bank transfer, since PayPal is the only method listed.

Oxylabs

Who it suits

  • Publishers with technical or developer audiences, since the verticals are security and hosting.
  • Networks and media buyers already inside HasOffers (TUNE), which is the listed payout route.
  • Anyone modelling earnings on a single conversion, because 50% per sale up to $2000 makes a capped per sale payment the whole calculation.

Who should look elsewhere

  • Publishers chasing recurring revenue, who earn more from 25-30% recurring for 12 months at Jasper or 25% to 35% recurring for 12 months at FirstPromoter.
  • Publishers who need live chat or phone answers, since support runs on email.
  • Publishers spreading effort across many small accounts, since 50% per sale up to $2000 rewards fewer, larger conversions.

Questions about each

Ghost Browser

What commission does Ghost Browser pay?+

Ghost Browser pays 20% on referred sales, and the programme runs on a cost-per-sale model with a recurring element. Recurring commission is part of the deal, so a referred customer who stays subscribed keeps generating a share rather than a single payment. The rate is listed as 20% recurring lifetime commissions, with no tiering attached to it.

How long is the cookie window?+

The cookie window runs 30 from the referral click, which matches the median for programmes on this site. It sits below the 60 upper quartile window and well under the 365 longest window recorded, so a reader who compares anti-detect browsers for weeks before subscribing can fall outside the window.

Oxylabs

What commission does the Oxylabs affiliate programme pay?+

Oxylabs pays 50% per sale up to $2000, at a commission rate of 50% on a cpa model, with the cap on a sale set at $2,000. A publisher is better served aiming a small number of high value subscriptions rather than chasing many small accounts, because the payment per conversion is what carries a month's earnings.

Is the Oxylabs programme recurring?+

Recurring commission is no, so a conversion pays once and that account contributes nothing after the first sale. Jasper at 25-30% recurring for 12 months and FirstPromoter at 25% to 35% recurring for 12 months both keep paying over the following year, which matters if the subscribers you send stick around.

Oxylabs

Oxylabs

Higher score in this comparison

See alternatives