CaddyvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Caddy | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 90/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 12 in Web Servers | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 78 528 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 466 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 6 |
| Latest release | v2.11.7 · 3 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Go | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Caddy scores 90/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
If you want the quickest setup, Caddy is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Caddy is growing faster right now (+2 466 stars in 30 days).
Caddy details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep Caddy, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with