RedashvsTube Archivist
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Redash | Tube Archivist | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 76/100 | 72/100 |
| Rank in category | #3 of 15 in Business Intelligence | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 28 851 | 8 552 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +42 | +83 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 2 | 6 |
| Latest release | v26.9.0 · 24 Sept 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 |
| Setup | Moderate | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | BSD-2-Clause | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | Python |
Which one should you pick?
Redash scores 76/100 against 72/100 for Tube Archivist, so it is the safer default.
Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for Redash.
If you want the quickest setup, Redash is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Redash details →Tube Archivist details →
Swap a project
Keep Redash, compare it with
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with