# Lidarr vs Tube Archivist

> Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.

| | Lidarr | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 72/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #6 of 142 in Media Management | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 5 788 | 8 552 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +109 ✓ | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 15 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v3.2.0.5144 · 26 Oct 2026 ✓ | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | C | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

Lidarr and Tube Archivist score the same (72/100), so the choice comes down to the details below.

Lidarr ships more often: 15 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

If you want the quickest setup, Lidarr is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.

## Details

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

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