AriaNgvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| AriaNg | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 69/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #7 of 45 in Download Management | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 13 264 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +62 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 4 | 6 |
| Latest release | 1.3.15 · 5 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | JavaScript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 69/100 for AriaNg, so it is the safer default.
Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 4 for AriaNg.
If you want the quickest setup, AriaNg is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
AriaNg details →Tube Archivist details →