Kong GatewayvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Kong Gateway | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 82/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 39 in API Gateway | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 44 319 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +129 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 3 | 6 |
| Latest release | 3.9.4 · 12 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Lua | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Kong Gateway scores 82/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for Kong Gateway.
If you want the quickest setup, Kong Gateway is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Kong Gateway details →Tube Archivist details →