pixelfinvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| pixelfin | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 48/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #79 of 142 in Media Management | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 177 | 8 553 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +84 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 18 | 6 |
| Latest release | v1.1.2 · 11 Oct 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | MIT | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 48/100 for pixelfin, so it is the safer default.
pixelfin ships more often: 18 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.
If you want the quickest setup, pixelfin is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Tube Archivist is growing faster right now (+84 stars in 30 days).
pixelfin details →Tube Archivist details →