# camofox-browser vs Tube 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).

## Details

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

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