# SyncWatch同步观影 vs Tube Archivist

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

| | SyncWatch同步观影 | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 46/100 | 72/100 ✓ |
| Rank in category | #24 of 36 in Video Streaming | #7 of 118 in Media Server |
| GitHub stars | 140 | 8 552 ✓ |
| Stars, last 30 days | +0 | +83 ✓ |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 10 ✓ | 6 |
| Latest release | v2.4.4 · 6 Sept 2026 | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Moderate ✓ | Advanced |
| Official Docker image | No | Yes ✓ |
| License | Apache-2.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Main language | JavaScript | Python |

## Which one should you pick?

Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 46/100 for SyncWatch同步观影, so it is the safer default.

SyncWatch同步观影 ships more often: 10 stable releases in the past year, against 6 for Tube Archivist.

If you want the quickest setup, SyncWatch同步观影 is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.

Tube Archivist is growing faster right now (+83 stars in 30 days).

## Details

- [SyncWatch同步观影](https://selfhost.directory/project/syncwatch) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/syncwatch.md)
- [Tube Archivist](https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/tube-archivist.md)

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