# marimo vs Tube Archivist

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

| | marimo | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 78/100 ✓ | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #9 of 166 in Developer Tools | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 23 364 ✓ | 8 553 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +473 ✓ | +84 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 21 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | 0.25.2 · 19 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

marimo scores 78/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.

marimo ships more often: 21 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

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

marimo is growing faster right now (+473 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

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