camofox-browservsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| camofox-browser | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 75/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 11 in Browser Automation | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 12 035 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +278 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 | 6 |
| Latest release | camoufox-backup-404310733 · 7 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?
camofox-browser scores 75/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
camofox-browser ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, camofox-browser is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
camofox-browser is growing faster right now (+278 stars in 30 days).
camofox-browser details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep camofox-browser, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with