FloodvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Flood | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 65/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 7 in Torrent | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 2 860 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +17 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 13 | 6 |
| Latest release | v4.16.3 · 17 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Easy | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 65/100 for Flood, so it is the safer default.
Flood ships more often: 13 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, Flood is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Tube Archivist is growing faster right now (+83 stars in 30 days).
Flood details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep Flood, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with