• Are you tech-savvy / willing to learn more about Linux and your PC / read the wiki/forums?
• Do you have the time/patience to keep up with the Arch news so you're aware of breaking changes?
• Do you have the time/patience/skills to fix things when they break?
• Do you have the time/patience to get your hands dirty to do manual configuration occasionally?

If the answer to all that is yes, then skip EndeavourOS and just install Arch directly. If you're not considering Arch because it's "too hard" or you don't have the time/patience, then trying to cheat by installing EndeavourOS will only result in pain down the line. The only thing EndeavourOS is doing is making the instalation process easy - it's not making Arch itself any more easier to use.

The manual way of installing Arch is a rite-of-passage that tests your patience and comprehension skills. It familiarises you with the Arch wiki, and forces you to learn more about how the OS works behind the scenes. So when things break in the future, or the time comes for you to do a manual intervention - you already have all the skills and knowledge (or know where to look). If you can pass the test of a manual install, then using Arch is easy-peasy. At this point, you wouldn't care about silly things like stability, because you already know about automated snapshots and restores, bug reports, building/using the latest patch/package from upstream etc... and it's all second-nature to you. Fixing a broken thing is just another day at the office and your brain won't even register it as an issue.

So, don't cheat - if you want to use Arch, just use Arch.

Edit: For those who disagree with me, here's a recent example of a manual intervention I was referring to: being on EndeavourOS or any other Arch derivatives won't save you from having to keep up with Arch news and occasionally having to take manual action like this: https://lemmy.nz/post/7648427

Also please do read the full thread - from the discussions there, you'll see that the steps you'd need to take for that piece of news is not entirely straightforward: some folks might need extra/different steps that's not explicitly described in the news/wiki. This is the kind of stuff you should be prepared to deal with.

It'll be fine, I'd argue Arch is actually more "stable" in the ordinary sense since it is simpler - in that partial upgrades are not allowed. So you never end up in a complicated mess like aptitude can be.

I've used Arch for over a decade now, and have only had issues 3 or 4 times (usually from the nvidia driver).

Just an update, I successfully switched my whole user data to EndeavourOS and installed almost everything I have used before. Works nice and smooth with KDE Plasma 6 in Wayland (although an NVIDIA downgrade to 535 is required for gaming until the latest driver is fixed).

(I disabled the Polonium tiling for the screenshot.)

Edit: Switched to Arch today :)

Regular Endeavor users can chime in, but it wasn't super "stable" over the past couple years, but I think mostly because it's easy to misconfigure and cause conflicts. It's meant to be highly configurable and variable without a lot of guardrails (I know they were adding most automation awhile back). If you know how to diagnose and fix basic issues that come along with that, I'm sure you'll be fine.

Try at least once install pure Arch from the installation instructions without automatic install scripts (best in VM to not worry about the data). It is a very good learning experience and definetly would get you closer to what Arch based systems are about.

Endeavour has been stable for me over the course of a year or so, with exceptions to issues related to nvidia.

Setup Btrfs + Btrfs Assistant, rollback if any update breaks things you need.

It's stable enough for me everyday use but this will depend on your use case + hardware setup. Even some people will swear by Manjaro for years without breaking. I found that usually if stuffs break in Arch, i can fix it but not so much if stuffs break by update from Ubuntu/Fedora.

I've been using EOS full-time (including for work, every weekday) for about 6 months. It's my favourite distro so far. I haven't modified any defaults -- I just use it and install the apps I need.

Is EndeavourOS stable enough for everyday use

Arch is not stable, and therefore neither is endeavour. That doesn't mean you can't use it, but expect that it will break, and always have arch live media with you if you're updating your system. Btrfs or something similar will save you from a lot of frustration.

would restoring home with BackInTime just work (as root user)?

You have the VM, try it out

Read up on .pacsave/.pacnew files, the distro might still work if an update creates these but if you don't diff/integrate them manually your OS might slowly "rot". So watch out for these when running an update. You'll see them less often if you don't change stuff much yourself.

Consider using BTRFS and test how to rollback, in case you need it.

Not specific advice, but make sure all the programs you use are available and where/how you will get them.

Is EndeavourOS stable enough for everyday use

Yes, as long as you maintain it.

would restoring home with BackInTime just work

Nothing in EndeavourOS really "just works". You have to install and configure the stuff you need.

I moved from kubuntu to endeavor a few months ago and it's been excellent. It might just be my hardware, but I had quite a few strange issues on my system with kubuntu that haven't appeared at all on endeavor

I’ve used endeavour as my daily driver for the last year, it’s been great for me. Highly recommend regular backups though, as it’s a bleeding edge rolling release distro, so more likely to break unexpectedly than ubuntu

I love Arch but you may also be interested to try Siduction for similar benefits with less change from what you know (it's still Debian).