NomadvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Nomad | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 77/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #2 of 11 in Container Orchestration | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 17 054 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +81 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 19 | 6 |
| Latest release | ent-changelog-1.10.18 · 28 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes |
| License | Other | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Go | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Nomad scores 77/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
Nomad ships more often: 19 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, Nomad is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Nomad details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep Nomad, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with