chromavsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| chroma | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 79/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 5 in Vector Database | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 29 600 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +231 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 7 | 6 |
| Latest release | latest · 24 Jun 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Rust | Python |
Which one should you pick?
chroma scores 79/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
chroma ships more often: 7 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, chroma is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
chroma is growing faster right now (+231 stars in 30 days).
chroma details →Tube Archivist details →