I switched to Brave in 2019 because I wanted privacy without the performance hit. Three years later, I was reading blog posts about their crypto wallet, their search engine, their VPN, their news reader, and their AI assistant.
None of which I asked for.
Last month I tried Helium — a browser that does exactly one thing: privacy-first browsing without the feature creep. No crypto. No business model beyond "make a good browser." Just Chromium, stripped of Google's tracking, with aggressive ad-blocking by default.
It feels like what Brave promised before they decided to become a platform.
The Thing About Brave That Nobody Says Out Loud
Brave started with a clear vision: fix the broken web advertising model by giving users control. Block ads by default, reward creators through their own system, and build a sustainable browser that respects privacy.
That was honest. It was ambitious. It might have worked.
Then came Basic Attention Token (BAT). Then Brave Search. Then Brave Wallet. Then Brave News. Then Brave Talk. Then Leo AI. Then Brave VPN (which is actually a proxy service but whatever).
Each addition made sense in isolation. Together, they created the opposite of what Brave claimed to be — a simple, focused browser. Now it's a platform with seven revenue streams and feature sprawl that would make Firefox jealous.
I'm not saying Brave is bad. I'm saying it's not what it promised anymore. And somewhere in that evolution, they lost the users who just wanted a fast, private browser without the ecosystem.
That's where Helium comes in.
What Helium Actually Is
Helium is ungoogled-chromium with quality-of-life improvements and zero business model. It's maintained by a small team who built it because they wanted a browser that didn't track them, didn't show them ads, and didn't try to sell them services.
The feature list is deliberately short: uBlock Origin preinstalled and enabled by default, all Google services removed, WebRTC leak protection, automatic HTTPS enforcement, and 13,000+ "bangs" for quick navigation (type !w search term to go directly to Wikipedia).
That's it. No cryptocurrency. No AI assistant trying to help. No news feed. No wallet. No sync service that requires an account.
Everything runs locally. Your data stays on your machine. Helium makes zero network requests without your explicit permission — literally zero on first launch. No update checks, no telemetry, no "anonymous" usage statistics.
This sounds trivial until you realize most "privacy-focused" browsers still phone home for updates, sync data through their servers, or collect anonymized metrics. Helium doesn't. If you want updates, you check manually or enable Helium Services (a privacy-preserving proxy).
The philosophy is aggressive: privacy by absence, not by configuration. Most browsers give you privacy options. Helium removes the things that violate privacy entirely.
Why This Feels Different
I've used privacy browsers. Firefox with hardening. Brave with settings tweaked. LibreWolf. Waterfox. All of them require configuration, trade-offs, or trust in defaults you can't verify.
Helium's defaults are visible in the source code. uBlock Origin is enabled. Third-party cookies are blocked. Fingerprinting protections are active. No exceptions for partners, advertisers, or "trusted" services.
The first time I opened a site known for aggressive tracking, I noticed the absence of change. No "this site requests permission" prompts. No "we value your privacy" cookie banners. The site loaded, cleanly, with everything blocked by default.
That's the difference between "privacy-focused" and "privacy-first." Privacy-focused means giving users control. Privacy-first means removing the attacks before users encounter them.
The bangs feature shows the same philosophy. Most browsers send your search queries to a server to resolve shortcuts. Helium processes bangs locally. Type !chatgpt your question and it opens ChatGPT with your query, but the query never passes through Helium's servers.
This matters more than it sounds. Your search patterns reveal more about you than your browsing history. Helium ensures those patterns stay private by never seeing them in the first place.
The Part Where Helium Is Worse
There's no password manager. Helium's position is that browsers shouldn't store credentials — use a dedicated password manager instead. That's philosophically correct and practically annoying if you're used to Chrome's autofill.
There's no sync. Your bookmarks, history, and settings stay local. If you use multiple devices, you're manually exporting and importing data. Or you're setting up your own sync solution with third-party tools.
Updates are manual on Windows. You download new releases from GitHub and install them yourself. An auto-updater is coming, but right now it's old-school software distribution.
The extension ecosystem has quirks. Helium supports Manifest V2 extensions (the ones Google is deprecating), which means uBlock Origin works fully. But installing extensions requires routing through Helium Services or manual installation. Not hard, but friction.
Performance is good but not exceptional. Helium is lighter than Chrome, noticeably faster than Firefox, but not dramatically different from other ungoogled-chromium forks. The speed benefit comes from ad-blocking, not browser optimization.
The development pace is slower than mainstream browsers. Features take time. Bugs get fixed eventually. You're not getting weekly updates with new capabilities. You're getting stable, careful releases that prioritize not breaking things.
The Comparison Nobody Wants To Make
Brave has 60 million monthly users. Helium has a few thousand. Brave has a $300 million valuation. Helium is a volunteer project with GitHub sponsors.
By conventional metrics, Brave won. They built a sustainable business, attracted users, and created a browser people actually use.
But what did they have to compromise to get there? How many features did they add that users didn't ask for? How many revenue streams did they bolt on to justify that valuation?
Helium proves the alternative is viable. You can build a privacy-first browser without cryptocurrency, AI services, or ecosystem lock-in. You can sustain development through donations and voluntary support. You won't get rich, but you won't compromise your principles either.
The question is whether that's enough. Does the world need another niche privacy browser, or should we accept that Brave's approach — compromising on simplicity to achieve scale — is the only way to compete with Chrome?
I don't have an answer. But I know which browser I'm using.
What Brave Could Have Been
Imagine Brave without BAT. Without Brave Search. Without the wallet, the VPN, the news feed, and the AI assistant.
Just the browser. Fast, private, well-funded through ethical means. Maybe a tip jar for supporting creators. Maybe private ads as opt-in. But focused on being the best browser, not the best platform.
That's the version of Brave I wanted. That's what Helium is trying to be.
The irony is that Brave's feature expansion was probably necessary for survival. Browsers are expensive to maintain. You need revenue. Donations don't scale. Building an ecosystem with multiple revenue streams makes business sense.
But it also betrays the original promise. Brave was supposed to be the simple, honest alternative to Chrome's surveillance capitalism. Instead, it became a different kind of platform — one with better privacy, but still trying to monetize users through various services.
Helium's bet is that some users don't want monetization. They want a browser that does exactly what it claims and nothing else. No upsells, no extra features, no revenue optimization.
That bet might fail. Most users don't care enough about privacy to tolerate manual updates and missing convenience features. But for the minority who do care, Helium is what Brave promised to be.
The Uncomfortable Truth About Privacy Browsers
Every privacy browser eventually faces the same problem: how do you fund development without monetizing users?
Firefox uses Google's default search deal ($450 million annually). Brave created cryptocurrency and an ad network. DuckDuckGo Browser (yes, they have a browser now) relies on their search engine revenue. Even Tor is funded primarily through government grants and NGO donations.
Helium's answer is: maybe we don't need that much funding. Maybe a small team maintaining a lean fork of Chromium doesn't require millions in annual revenue. Maybe GitHub sponsors and voluntary donations are sufficient.
This only works if scope stays limited. No mobile browser (too expensive). No extensions marketplace (too much maintenance). No sync service (too much infrastructure). Just the browser, updates, and community support.
That's a viable model for a niche project. It's not a viable model for competing with Chrome. And maybe that's fine. Maybe we don't need every privacy browser to compete with Chrome. Maybe we just need them to exist for the users who want them.
The alternative is that all privacy browsers eventually compromise on privacy to fund development. That's not cynicism — it's economics. Development costs money, and money comes from somewhere.
Helium's model delays that compromise by keeping costs minimal. But it can't delay it forever.
What You Should Actually Do
Try Helium if you're already invested in privacy browsers. It's a legitimate alternative to Brave, Firefox, and other privacy-focused options. The setup friction is real but manageable.
Don't try Helium if you need convenience features. Password sync, automatic updates, cloud bookmarks — all of that requires external tools. If those are dealbreakers, stick with Brave or Firefox.
Consider what you actually want from a browser. Is privacy your top priority, or is it one factor among many? Helium optimizes exclusively for privacy. If you value speed, features, or ecosystem integration equally, mainstream options might serve you better.
Download from helium.computer. Setup takes five minutes. Most Chrome extensions work through manual installation or Helium Services. The learning curve is minimal if you're already comfortable with Chromium-based browsers.
Pay attention to what annoys you. If manual updates feel like a dealbreaker, Helium isn't for you. If the absence of tracking feels liberating, you found your browser.
Where This Goes
Helium is in beta. Features are incomplete. Rough edges exist. The project could stall, fork, or get abandoned like dozens of other privacy browsers.
Or it could become the thing Brave was supposed to be — a sustainable, honest alternative to mainstream browsers that prioritizes users over business models.
The precedent isn't encouraging. Most privacy projects either fail (insufficient funding) or compromise (adding revenue streams that undermine privacy). The few that survive usually do so through external funding that creates different pressures.
Helium's bet is that staying small and focused is sustainable. That's unproven. But it's also the only path that doesn't eventually lead to feature bloat or monetization compromises.
The real question is whether enough users care. If 10,000 people use Helium and contribute $5/month, that's $50,000 monthly for development. That's not Chrome money, but it's sufficient for a small team maintaining a fork.
If users don't contribute, development slows, features stagnate, and Helium becomes another abandoned Chromium fork. That's the risk.
The reward is a browser that actually delivers on Brave's original promise — privacy without compromise, speed without tracking, and simplicity without ecosystem lock-in.
Whether that's worth the trade-offs depends on what you value. For me, it is. For most users, probably not.
And maybe that's the point. Privacy browsers don't need to win. They just need to exist for the people who want them.
Let's Connect!
If you're new to my content, I'm Bhavyansh Yadav — a software engineer sharing practical lessons from building and breaking production systems.
I write consistently on Medium, and if you want deeper dives, frameworks, and actionable insights delivered to your inbox every Wednesday, join my newsletter:
Thanks for reading!