# Matomo vs Tube Archivist

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

| | Matomo | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 74/100 ✓ | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 21 in Web analytics | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 21 985 ✓ | 8 553 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +91 ✓ | +84 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 42 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | 6.0.0-b9.20261029180526 · 29 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 | PHP | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

Matomo scores 74/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.

Matomo ships more often: 42 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

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

## Details

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

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