Loops vs Tube Archivist
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?
Loops
Federated short video sharing platform
VS
Tube Archivist
Self-hosted YouTube media server with metadata and search
| Feature | Loops | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Social Networks | Media Servers |
| License | AGPL-3.0-or-later | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | PHP | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 350 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 437 | ★ 8,342 |
| First released | 2025 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Instagram, TikTok, YouTube | YouTube |
Why pick each one
Choose Loops if…
- Released under the AGPL-3.0-or-later license
- Written in PHP
- Lightweight — runs in 350 MB RAM
Frequently asked questions
Is Loops or Tube Archivist better?
Neither is universally better. Tube Archivist has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Loops and Tube Archivist free and open-source?
Yes. Loops is licensed under AGPL-3.0-or-later and Tube Archivist under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Loops and Tube Archivist with Docker?
Loops: check the project docs for container support. Tube Archivist: yes.