SRS vs Stash
| Tagline | High-efficiency real-time video server supporting RTMP, WebRTC, HLS, and SRT | Self-hosted adult media library organizer with auto-tagging and metadata scraping |
| Category | Media Servers & Streaming | Media Servers & Streaming |
| Replaces | Plex | Plex |
| GitHub stars | 29k | 12k |
| Language | Docker | Docker |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 |
| Self-host difficulty | 3/5 Moderate | 2/5 Easy |
| Deploy options | Docker Docker Compose Manual | Docker Docker Compose Manual |
| Managed hosting | ||
| Last updated | 20 days ago | 2 days ago |
| View repo | View repo |
Where each falls short
The honest trade-offs — what you give up with each, versus the proprietary tools they replace.
SRS
- No built-in media library or VOD management; primarily focused on live ingest and relay.
- English documentation is limited compared to the Chinese-language docs.
- Lacks a polished end-user playback UI; requires pairing with a separate frontend.
- No DRM or subscription/paywall features for commercial content delivery.
Stash
- Highly niche scope; not suitable for general-purpose media libraries.
- Mobile apps are community-made and not officially supported.
- Metadata scraping depends on community-maintained StashDB, which can have gaps.
- No hardware transcoding support; playback quality is limited by server CPU.
Bottom line
Choose Stash if you want the lower-effort setup; choose SRS for the larger community and ecosystem. Stash has seen more recent development. Open each guide below for deploy steps and the full feature gap.
Stash
Self-hosted adult media library organizer with auto-tagging and metadata scraping