# Tube Archivist vs WBO

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

| | Tube Archivist | WBO |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 72/100 ✓ | 61/100 |
| Rank in category | #7 of 118 in Media Server | #2 of 9 in Whiteboarding |
| GitHub stars | 8 552 ✓ | 2 675 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +83 ✓ | +18 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 6 |
| Latest release | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 | v2.18.28 · 29 Oct 2026 ✓ |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy ✓ |
| Official Docker image | Yes | Yes |
| License | GPL-3.0 | AGPL-3.0 |
| Main language | Python | JavaScript |

## Which one should you pick?

Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 61/100 for WBO, so it is the safer default.

If you want the quickest setup, WBO 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)
- [WBO](https://selfhost.directory/project/wbo) (markdown: https://selfhost.directory/project/wbo.md)

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