ArchiveBoxvsWindows ARM
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| ArchiveBox | Windows ARM | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 79/100 | 61/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 12 in Archiving & Preservation | #7 of 15 in Virtualization |
| GitHub stars | 28 897 | 2 260 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +308 | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 9 | 10 |
| Latest release | v0.9.77 · 27 Oct 2026 | v6.06 · 5 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Batchfile |
Which one should you pick?
ArchiveBox scores 79/100 against 61/100 for Windows ARM, so it is the safer default.
Windows ARM ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 9 for ArchiveBox.
If you want the quickest setup, ArchiveBox is easier to run; Windows ARM needs more configuration.
ArchiveBox is growing faster right now (+308 stars in 30 days).
ArchiveBox details →Windows ARM details →
Swap a project
Keep ArchiveBox, compare it with
Keep Windows ARM, compare it with