Covalent excels at providing a unified, normalized API across over 200 blockchains, including Ethereum, Polygon, and Avalanche. Its strength lies in abstracting away blockchain-specific complexities, offering a single query interface for wallet balances, NFT holdings, and transaction histories. For example, developers can fetch a user's entire cross-chain portfolio with a single API call, a critical feature for multi-chain dApps and wallets. This is powered by its extensive data lake, which indexes structured data from the genesis block of supported chains.
LABS
Comparisons
Covalent vs Bitquery: On-chain Data Analytics APIs
A technical comparison of Covalent and Bitquery, two leading unified APIs for multi-chain analytics, focusing on data models, cost, performance, and ideal use cases for engineering leaders.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for On-Chain Intelligence
A data-driven comparison of Covalent and Bitquery, two leading APIs for accessing and analyzing on-chain data.
Bitquery takes a different approach by offering a powerful GraphQL interface and a focus on deep, customizable analytics. This strategy results in superior flexibility for complex queries—like tracking specific DeFi protocol flows or analyzing miner extractable value (MEV)—but requires more developer expertise. Its Bloxy tools provide granular access to raw and decoded data, making it a favorite for on-chain researchers and trading firms needing to build custom dashboards and real-time alerting systems.
The key trade-off: If your priority is developer velocity and simplicity for building consumer-facing applications like wallets or explorers, choose Covalent. Its unified API drastically reduces integration time. If you prioritize deep, customizable analytics and real-time data science for internal research or trading, choose Bitquery. Its flexible GraphQL and raw data access enable complex, bespoke queries that other APIs cannot easily support.
tldr-summary
COVALENT VS BITQUERY
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs for two leading on-chain data API providers.
01
Covalent: Unmatched Data Breadth
Unified API across 200+ blockchains: Single endpoint for Ethereum, Polygon, Avalanche, and niche chains like Moonbeam. This matters for multi-chain dApps and portfolio trackers needing a single integration point.
02
Covalent: Historical Granularity
Full historical data without archival nodes: Access every wallet balance, transaction, and log event from genesis. This is critical for on-chain forensics, compliance reporting, and deep historical analysis where data completeness is non-negotiable.
03
Bitquery: Real-Time Streaming
Low-latency GraphQL subscriptions: Real-time streams for mempool transactions, DEX swaps, and token transfers with sub-second latency. This matters for high-frequency trading bots, live dashboards, and arbitrage systems.
04
Bitquery: On-Chain Intelligence
Pre-built analytics for DeFi & NFTs: Specialized data sets for liquidity pool metrics, NFT floor prices, and money flow analysis. This accelerates development for DeFi analytics platforms and NFT marketplaces by reducing data transformation work.
05
Covalent: Developer Experience
Consistent REST API & SDKs: Predictable pagination, rich SDKs (Python, JS), and a generous free tier. This reduces integration time for startups and enterprises building proof-of-concepts or scaling production apps.
06
Bitquery: Flexible Query Power
GraphQL for complex, nested queries: Fetch related data (e.g., a swap with its token details and pool stats) in a single request. This is optimal for data scientists and analysts crafting custom, efficient queries without multiple API calls.
COVALENT VS BITQUERY
Head-to-Head Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for on-chain data analytics APIs.
| Metric | Covalent | Bitquery |
|---|---|---|
Pricing Model (Pro Tier) | Usage-based queries & compute | Fixed monthly subscription |
Supported Blockchains | 200+ | 40+ |
Historical Data Depth | Full history for all chains | Varies by chain (e.g., ~1 year for Ethereum) |
Unified API | ||
Real-time Data (WebSockets) | ||
Data Lake / Raw SQL Access | ||
Free Tier Daily Limit | 5,000 credits | 100,000 credits |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Covalent vs Bitquery: On-chain Data Analytics APIs
A data-driven comparison of two leading blockchain data providers, highlighting key architectural and commercial trade-offs for enterprise decision-makers.
01
Covalent's Strength: Unified API
Single API for 200+ blockchains: Query across Ethereum, Polygon, Avalanche, and others with identical endpoints. This matters for multi-chain dApps and portfolio trackers needing consistent data models without managing separate integrations for each chain.
200+
Supported Chains
03
Bitquery's Strength: Real-time Streaming
WebSocket-first architecture: Subscribe to real-time transactions, logs, and traces with sub-second latency. This matters for high-frequency trading bots, live dashboards, and arbitrage systems where reacting to mempool or immediate on-chain events is critical.
< 1 sec
Stream Latency
05
Covalent's Trade-off: Data Freshness
Batch-oriented indexing: Data can lag behind the chain head by several blocks during peak loads. This is a trade-off for arbitrageurs or liquidation engines requiring absolute real-time data, making Bitquery's streaming a better fit for those latency-sensitive use cases.
06
Bitquery's Trade-off: Chain Coverage Complexity
Per-chain configuration: While supporting major chains like Ethereum and BSC, integrating a new chain requires explicit schema mapping. This matters for projects rapidly deploying on emerging L2s or app-chains, where Covalent's blanket coverage offers faster time-to-market.
pros-cons-b
COVALENT VS BITQUERY
Bitquery: Pros and Cons
A balanced breakdown of strengths and trade-offs for two leading on-chain data API providers.
01
Bitquery Pro: GraphQL Flexibility
Native GraphQL API: Enables complex, nested queries in a single request, reducing network overhead. This matters for building custom dashboards or fetching multi-chain wallet portfolios where you need token balances, NFT holdings, and transaction history simultaneously.
02
Bitquery Pro: Real-Time Streaming
WebSocket & GraphQL Subscriptions: Provides live data streams for transactions, logs, and token transfers. This is critical for high-frequency trading bots, real-time alert systems, or live NFT mint trackers that require sub-second latency.
03
Bitquery Con: Steeper Learning Curve
GraphQL Expertise Required: Teams must learn GraphQL schemas and query optimization, unlike RESTful endpoints. This adds development time for engineers unfamiliar with the paradigm, impacting rapid prototyping and MVP timelines compared to more straightforward REST APIs.
04
Bitquery Con: Pricing Complexity
Credit-based Model with Query Complexity Pricing: Costs are tied to computational units (CU), which can be unpredictable for complex or high-volume queries. This creates budgeting challenges for high-throughput dApps or analytics platforms where usage patterns fluctuate, unlike simpler per-request models.
05
Covalent Pro: Unified API Model
Consistent REST API across 200+ blockchains: Single, predictable data model (e.g., Class A and Class B NFTs) simplifies multi-chain development. This matters for portfolio aggregators and cross-chain explorers needing to support Ethereum, Polygon, Avalanche, and others without rewriting logic.
06
Covalent Pro: Historical Data Simplicity
No-Code Data Warehousing: Provides direct, paginated access to full historical data (e.g., all transactions for an address) without running complex indexers. This is ideal for on-chain analytics and retrospective reporting where bulk historical extraction is more valuable than real-time streams.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
Covalent for DeFi
Verdict: The definitive choice for comprehensive, historical DeFi analytics. Strengths: Covalent's Unified API provides unparalleled depth for DeFi protocols like Uniswap, Aave, and Compound. It excels at historical balance tracking, multi-chain portfolio aggregation, and complex transaction decoding (e.g., parsing intricate swap routes). Its time-series data is essential for calculating impermanent loss, yield history, and user ROI over time. Use Case Example: Building a dashboard that shows a user's complete DeFi exposure across 10+ chains, including historical staking rewards and liquidity pool performance.
Bitquery for DeFi
Verdict: Superior for real-time, high-frequency trading analytics and arbitrage. Strengths: Bitquery's GraphQL API and streaming capabilities offer lower-latency access to mempool and block data. This is critical for MEV bots, arbitrage scanners, and real-time DEX analytics (e.g., tracking large swaps on PancakeSwap or Curve instantly). Its Bloxy tools are geared towards on-chain investigation of smart money movements. Use Case Example: Creating a real-time alert system for large stablecoin depegs or identifying nascent liquidity pool opportunities before others.
COVALENT VS BITQUERY
Technical Deep Dive: Architecture and Data Models
A technical comparison of two leading on-chain data API providers, focusing on their underlying architecture, data models, and performance implications for enterprise applications.
Bitquery typically offers faster query response times for simple, real-time data. Its GraphQL API and specialized streaming architecture are optimized for low-latency queries on recent blocks. Covalent prioritizes comprehensive historical data retrieval, which can be slower for complex queries but provides unparalleled depth. For example, fetching the last 10 transactions for an address is faster on Bitquery, while fetching a wallet's complete transaction history with decoded logs is more robust on Covalent.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
Choosing between Covalent and Bitquery hinges on your application's specific data scope, freshness requirements, and architectural philosophy.
Covalent excels at providing a unified, historical data layer across 200+ blockchains because of its Universal API and GoldRush indexing framework. This abstraction allows developers to query complex data like NFT ownership, token balances, and transaction histories with a single, consistent schema, drastically reducing integration time. For example, its Network Activity API can deliver historical token transfers for any wallet across supported chains with a single call, a powerful feature for portfolio dashboards and compliance tools.
Bitquery takes a different approach by offering deep, real-time analytics and raw data access, particularly for high-frequency trading and DeFi applications. Its GraphQL API and Streaming APIs provide sub-second latency for live mempool data, DEX trades, and smart contract events. This results in a trade-off: while Bitquery offers unparalleled granularity and speed for specific chains like Ethereum and BSC, its coverage is more selective compared to Covalent's breadth, and the learning curve for its powerful GraphQL interface can be steeper.
The key trade-off: If your priority is broad multi-chain coverage, historical data consistency, and developer velocity for applications like cross-chain explorers or tax reporting, choose Covalent. Its unified model simplifies building at scale. If you prioritize ultra-low-latency, real-time data feeds, and deep analytical flexibility for use cases like arbitrage bots, live dashboards, or custom on-chain research, choose Bitquery. Its powerful querying capabilities offer raw power for specialists.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall