Stash vs Tube Archivist
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted media servers options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Stash
Self-hosted media organizer and server
VS
Tube Archivist
Self-hosted YouTube media server with metadata and search
| Feature | Stash | Tube Archivist |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Media Servers | Media Servers |
| License | AGPL-3.0 | GPL-3.0 |
| Language | Go | Python |
| Setup difficulty | Easy | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 256 MB | 2,048 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 12,802 | ★ 8,342 |
| First released | 2019 | 2021 |
| Replaces | Plex | YouTube |
Why pick each one
Frequently asked questions
Is Stash or Tube Archivist better?
Stash is the stronger all-round pick: it has both the larger community and the simpler easy setup. Consider Tube Archivist if its specific feature set fits your needs better.
Are Stash and Tube Archivist free and open-source?
Yes. Stash is licensed under AGPL-3.0 and Tube Archivist under GPL-3.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Stash and Tube Archivist with Docker?
Stash: yes. Tube Archivist: yes.