head to head · open source

tubearchivist vs tubesync

tubearchivist has 8,451 GitHub stars, 420 forks, 25 open issues and last shipped 21 days ago. tubesync has 2,794 stars, 171 forks, 58 open issues and last shipped yesterday. tubearchivist leads on adoption by 202% (8,451 vs 2,794 stars). tubearchivist is written in Python under GPL-3.0; tubesync is written in Python under AGPL-3.0. tubearchivist has attracted 5% as many forks as stars, tubesync 6%. tubesync was the more recently maintained of the two, and both are self-hostable with no licence fee. The two share 3 topic tags (media-server, youtube, youtube-dl), so they are genuine substitutes rather than adjacent tools.

Two open source projects, one decision. Both are free and self-hostable — the differences are community size, license terms, language stack and release pace.

tubearchivist ★ 8.5K tubesync ★ 2.8K category Content & Publishing

← all 8884 open source comparisons

Side by side

tubearchivist tubesync
GitHub stars ★ 8.5K ★ 2.8K
License GPL-3.0 AGPL-3.0
Written in Python Python
Last push 2026-08-28 2026-09-17
Forks ⑂ 420 ⑂ 171
Self-hosting Yes Yes
Data ownership Your server Your server

pick tubearchivist if

  • You weight community size — 8.5K stars and counting
  • You want the GPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You value the larger contributor base for long-term maintenance

full tubearchivist profile →

pick tubesync if

  • You want the tubesync feature set and don't need the biggest community
  • You prefer the AGPL-3.0 license terms
  • Your stack matches Python
  • You evaluated both and tubesync fits your workflow better

full tubesync profile →

About tubearchivist

Tube Archivist is a self hosted YouTube media server that downloads videos with yt dlp, indexes them with metadata from YouTube, and serves them back through a searchable web interface, built for people whose personal YouTube archive has grown past the point where folders and filenames still work.

read the full tubearchivist overview →

About tubesync

TubeSync is a self hosted personal video recorder for YouTube. It synchronizes YouTube channels and playlists into local directories, then updates a connected media server after downloads complete. The project lives in the self hosted media server ecosystem, where users keep downloaded video and audio files available through services such as Jellyfin or Plex.

read the full tubesync overview →

More in Content & Publishing

next.js ★ 142K storybook ★ 91K hugo ★ 90K Understand-Anything ★ 83K Strapi ★ 73K nuxt ★ 61K

Related comparisons

mediamtx vs tubearchivist mediamtx vs go2rtc mediamtx vs streama mediamtx vs cloudflare-imgbed mediamtx vs node-media-server mediamtx vs lychee mediamtx vs seanime go2rtc vs streama next-js vs nuxt next-js vs gatsby next-js vs ghost next-js vs jekyll next-js vs hexo next-js vs nextra next-js vs kit next-js vs vike storybook vs understand-anything storybook vs devdocs storybook vs docsify understand-anything vs devdocs storybook vs wiki storybook vs mkdocs-material understand-anything vs docsify understand-anything vs wiki

More Digital Asset Management (DAM) projects

Compare either of these against the rest of the Digital Asset Management (DAM) field.

tubearchivist vs mediamtx tubearchivist vs go2rtc tubearchivist vs streama tubearchivist vs CloudFlare-ImgBed tubearchivist vs Node-Media-Server tubearchivist vs Lychee tubearchivist vs seanime tubearchivist vs Piwigo tubearchivist vs nginx-http-flv-module tubearchivist vs foss_photo_libraries tubearchivist vs UniversalMediaServer tubearchivist vs lap

Frequently asked questions

Is tubearchivist or tubesync more popular?

tubearchivist has 8,451 GitHub stars and tubesync has 2,794. tubearchivist has the larger community by that measure.

Are tubearchivist and tubesync free?

Both are open source. tubearchivist is licensed under GPL-3.0 and tubesync under AGPL-3.0. Neither carries a licence fee.

What is the difference between tubearchivist and tubesync?

tubearchivist is written in Python and tubesync in Python. The practical differences are community size, licence terms, language stack and release cadence — all compared in the table above.

Which should I choose, tubearchivist or tubesync?

Choose tubearchivist if you want the larger community (8,451 stars) or its GPL-3.0 licence terms. Choose tubesync if its feature set, stack or AGPL-3.0 licence fits better. Both are self-hostable.