# budibase vs Tube Archivist

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

| | budibase | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 74/100 ✓ | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 17 in Low Code | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 28 368 ✓ | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +66 | +83 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 75 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v3.51.0-cloud.7 · 21 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Other | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

budibase scores 74/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.

budibase ships more often: 75 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

If you want the quickest setup, budibase is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.

## Details

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

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