GristvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Grist | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 75/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 10 in Data Management | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 12 014 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +155 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 16 | 6 |
| Latest release | v1.7.21 · 9 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 | Typescript | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Grist scores 75/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
Grist ships more often: 16 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, Grist is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Grist details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep Grist, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with