# openclaw vs Tube Archivist

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

| | openclaw | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 93/100 ✓ | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #1 of 125 in AI | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 393 312 ✓ | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +2 888 ✓ | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 37 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v2026.10.8 · 27 Oct 2026 ✓ | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

openclaw scores 93/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.

openclaw ships more often: 37 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

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

openclaw is growing faster right now (+2 888 stars in 30 days).

## Details

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

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