PeerTube vs Tube Archivist

Both are self-hosted media streaming - video streaming projects. This page compares how well each one is actually maintained — the part you cannot see from a feature list.

PeerTube scores 89 against Tube Archivist's 70, putting it ahead on the strength of a higher commit volume. That measures project health, not feature fit — Tube Archivist may still be the right choice if it does what you need.

	PeerTube	Tube Archivist
Health score	89/100	70/100
Commits (11 mo)	1929	219
Commits (last 3 mo)	557	35
Stars	15k	8.5k
Latest release	15 Sept 2026	25 Aug 2026
Licence	AGPL-3.0	GPL-3.0
Built with	Nodejs	Docker
Typical RAM	1 GB	1 GB

PeerTube

Decentralized video streaming platform using P2P (BitTorrent) directly in the web browser.

89/100

Thriving

High commit volume, frequent releases and growing activity.

Maintenance 35/40

Releases 25/25

Community 17/20

Momentum 12/15

Commit activity more than 89% of tracked projects; popularity more than 85%. How this is calculated.

Commits, last 11 months

Tube Archivist

Organize, search, and enjoy your YouTube collection. Subscribe, download, and track viewed content with metadata indexing and a user-friendly interface.

70/100

Healthy

Actively maintained with regular releases.

Maintenance 18/40

Releases 25/25

Community 15/20

Momentum 12/15

Commit activity more than 45% of tracked projects; popularity more than 76%. How this is calculated.

Commits, last 11 months

How to read this

Everything above is measured, not opinion: commit counts and release dates come from the public repositories, and the health score ranks each project against all 1352 projects we track. Read the full method.

What this comparison deliberately does not do is tell you which has the better feature set. Maintenance health tells you which project will still be receiving security fixes in two years. Decide that first, then compare features on the projects that survive the filter.

See every option in this category: self-hosted media streaming - video streaming.