ArchiveBoxvsAtoM
Two self-hosted Archiving & Preservation projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ArchiveBox | AtoM | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 79/100 | 56/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 12 in Archiving & Preservation | #6 of 12 in Archiving & Preservation |
| GitHub stars | 28 895 | 304 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +315 | — |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 9 | 5 |
| Latest release | v0.9.77 · 27 Oct 2026 | v2.7.3-hotfix.1 · 26 Aug 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | PHP |
Which one should you pick?
ArchiveBox scores 79/100 against 56/100 for AtoM, so it is the safer default.
ArchiveBox ships more often: 9 stable releases in the past year, against 5 for AtoM.
If you want the quickest setup, ArchiveBox is easier to run; AtoM needs more configuration.
ArchiveBox is growing faster right now (+315 stars in 30 days).
ArchiveBox details →AtoM details →All Archiving & Preservation projects →
Swap a project
Keep ArchiveBox, compare it with
Keep AtoM, compare it with