# AriaNg vs Tube 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.

## Details

- [AriaNg](https://selfhost.directory/project/ariang) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/ariang.md)
- [Tube Archivist](https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist.md)

---
Source: https://selfhost.directory/compare/ariang-vs-tube-archivist