# Tube Archivist vs UmlautAdaptarr

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

| | Tube Archivist | UmlautAdaptarr |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 72/100 ✓ | 40/100 |
| Rank in category | #7 of 118 in Media Server | #119 of 142 in Media Management |
| GitHub stars | 8 552 ✓ | 309 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +83 ✓ | +0 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 ✓ | 3 |
| Latest release | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 ✓ | v0.7.6 · 5 Aug 2026 |
| Setup | Advanced | Moderate ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | — |
| Main language | Python | C |

## Which one should you pick?

Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 40/100 for UmlautAdaptarr, so it is the safer default.

Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 3 for UmlautAdaptarr.

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

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

## Details

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

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