# ryot vs Tube Archivist

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

| | ryot | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 63/100 | 72/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #4 of 11 in Fitness Tracker | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 3 648 | 8 552 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +42 | +83 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 2 | 6 ✓ |
| Latest release | v10.5.0 · 22 Aug 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | GPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Typescript | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 63/100 for ryot, so it is the safer default.

Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 2 for ryot.

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

## Details

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

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