Tube ArchivistvsWorkout.cool
Two self-hosted projects, compared on the numbers selfhost.directory tracks live: score, popularity, release cadence and setup effort.
| Tube Archivist | Workout.cool | |
|---|---|---|
| Score | 72/100 | 66/100 |
| Rank in category | #7 of 118 in Media Server | #2 of 11 in Fitness Tracker |
| GitHub stars | 8 552 | 8 652 |
| Stars, last 30 days | +83 | +153 |
| Stable releases, 12 months | 6 | 1 |
| Latest release | v0.6.0 · 25 Oct 2026 | v1.3.2 · 7 Dec 2025 |
| Setup | Advanced | Easy |
| Official Docker image | Yes | No |
| License | GPL-3.0 | MIT |
| Main language | Python | Typescript |
Which one should you pick?
Tube Archivist scores 72/100 against 66/100 for Workout.cool, so it is the safer default.
Tube Archivist ships more often: 6 stable releases in the past year, against 1 for Workout.cool.
If you want the quickest setup, Workout.cool is easier to run; Tube Archivist needs more configuration.
Tube Archivist details →Workout.cool details →
Swap a project
Keep Tube Archivist, compare it with
Keep Workout.cool, compare it with