ArchiveBox vs CommaFeed
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted apps from related categories — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
ArchiveBox
Self-hosted web archiving from bookmarks and feeds
VS
CommaFeed
Google Reader-inspired self-hosted RSS reader
| Feature | ArchiveBox | CommaFeed |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Bookmarks & Read-It-Later | RSS & News Readers |
| License | MIT | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Python | Java |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 28,079 | ★ 3,579 |
| First released | 2017 | 2013 |
| Replaces | Feedly, Google Reader |
Why pick each one
Choose ArchiveBox if…
- Thorough page preservation
- Imports from many sources
- Open formats
Frequently asked questions
Is ArchiveBox or CommaFeed better?
Neither is universally better. ArchiveBox has the larger community, while CommaFeed is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are ArchiveBox and CommaFeed free and open-source?
Yes. ArchiveBox is licensed under MIT and CommaFeed under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run ArchiveBox and CommaFeed with Docker?
ArchiveBox: yes. CommaFeed: yes.