# OpenBao vs Tube Archivist

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

| | OpenBao | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 ✓ | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 12 in Secrets Management | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 8 768 ✓ | 8 553 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +1 278 ✓ | +84 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 15 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v2.7.2 · 26 Oct 2026 ✓ | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MPL-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Go | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

OpenBao scores 76/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.

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

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

OpenBao is growing faster right now (+1 278 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

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