# bookwyrm vs Tube Archivist

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | bookwyrm | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 58/100 | 72/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #26 of 69 in Social Networks & Forums | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 2 808 | 8 552 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +22 | +83 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 12 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v0.9.4 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Advanced ✓ |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | Other | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 58/100 for bookwyrm, so it is the safer default.

bookwyrm ships more often: 12 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

Tube Archivist is growing faster right now (+83 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

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