Indexing EVM Chains Only excels at developer velocity and ecosystem depth because it leverages a single, mature development paradigm. For example, building with tools like Hardhat, Foundry, and The Graph's subgraphs allows teams to deploy on Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Polygon with minimal retooling, tapping into a collective $50B+ DeFi TVL. This specialization reduces operational overhead and accelerates time-to-market for protocols focused on the dominant Web3 economy.
LABS
Comparisons
Indexing EVM Chains Only vs Indexing Heterogeneous Chains (EVM, Cosmos, Solana): Chain Support
A technical comparison of The Graph's EVM-native protocol versus building custom indexers for multi-chain support. Analyzes development overhead, data consistency, and strategic flexibility for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Strategic Crossroads of Chain Support
Choosing a blockchain indexing strategy is a foundational decision that determines your protocol's reach, complexity, and future-proofing.
Indexing Heterogeneous Chains (EVM, Cosmos, Solana) takes a different approach by architecting for maximum market coverage and future optionality. This strategy results in a significant trade-off: it requires mastering multiple execution environments (EVM, CosmWasm, Solana's Sealevel) and toolchains, increasing initial complexity. However, it unlocks access to high-throughput chains like Solana (2-5k TPS) and the sovereign app-chain ecosystem of Cosmos, which are often home to the next wave of innovative applications.
The key trade-off: If your priority is deep liquidity, established tooling, and a faster build cycle within the dominant EVM landscape, choose an EVM-only strategy. If you prioritize maximizing user reach, hedging ecosystem risk, and building for high-performance or app-specific chains from day one, choose a heterogeneous chain strategy. The latter is a bet on the multi-chain future, while the former is an optimization for the multi-chain present.
tldr-summary
Indexing EVM-Only vs. Heterogeneous Chains
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs for infrastructure teams choosing an indexing strategy.
01
EVM-Only Indexing: Pros
Deep Protocol-Level Optimization: Tools like The Graph's Subgraph Standard and TrueBlocks' local-first indexing are purpose-built for the EVM state model, enabling faster sync times and more efficient query patterns for ERC-20, ERC-721, and complex DeFi events.
Unified Developer Experience: A single SDK (e.g., Ethers.js, Viem) and query language (GraphQL) works across all supported chains, reducing onboarding time and code duplication for teams building on Arbitrum, Polygon, and Base.
02
EVM-Only Indexing: Cons
Architectural Lock-In: Your entire data layer is tied to the EVM ecosystem. Expanding to non-EVM chains like Solana or Cosmos requires building a parallel, entirely separate indexing pipeline, doubling engineering overhead.
Missed Cross-Chain Opportunities: Cannot natively index IBC packet flows (Osmosis, Injective) or Solana's Sealevel runtime events, limiting your protocol's ability to aggregate data and liquidity across the broader multi-chain landscape.
03
Heterogeneous Indexing: Pros
Future-Proof Architecture: A single abstraction layer (e.g., Subsquid's multi-chain support, Goldsky's federated gateways) can ingest data from EVM, Cosmos (via CosmWasm), Solana, and others. This protects your stack from ecosystem volatility.
Unified Data Lake: Build cross-chain analytics, dashboards, and applications that query across ecosystems without maintaining multiple data silos. Essential for protocols like Jupiter (Solana) integrating with Axelar (Cosmos) and Chainlink CCIP (EVM).
04
Heterogeneous Indexing: Cons
Increased Implementation Complexity: Supporting diverse VMs (EVM, SVM, CosmWasm) and consensus mechanisms requires more generalized, and often less optimized, data ingestion pipelines. Initial setup and schema design are more demanding.
Performance Trade-Offs: May sacrifice chain-specific optimizations for breadth. An indexer fine-tuned for Ethereum's log indexing might not handle Solana's account-based model or Cosmos' IBC events with the same latency or cost-efficiency.
CHAIN SUPPORT
Head-to-Head Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of indexing infrastructure based on blockchain ecosystem support.
| Metric | Indexing EVM Chains Only | Indexing Heterogeneous Chains |
|---|---|---|
Native EVM Support (Solidity) | ||
Cosmos SDK Support (CosmWasm) | ||
Solana Support (Rust/Sealevel) | ||
Aptos/Sui Support (Move) | ||
Multi-Chain Query in Single API | ||
Required Developer Skillsets | Solidity/JavaScript | Solidity, Rust, Go, Move |
Protocol Examples | Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum | Ethereum, Cosmos, Solana, Aptos |
pros-cons-a
CHAIN SUPPORT COMPARISON
The Graph (EVM-Focused): Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for indexing EVM-only vs. heterogeneous chains.
01
Pro: Deep EVM Specialization
Optimized for the dominant standard: The Graph's core infrastructure is purpose-built for the Ethereum Virtual Machine, supporting over 40 EVM chains like Arbitrum, Polygon, and Base. This results in mature tooling (Graph CLI, Subgraph Studio), extensive documentation, and a large pool of experienced indexers and developers. This matters for teams building exclusively on EVM L2s who need reliable, battle-tested indexing.
40+
EVM Chains
02
Pro: Unmatched Ecosystem & Composability
Largest network effect for EVM data: With thousands of live subgraphs powering major dApps like Uniswap, Aave, and Compound, The Graph offers unparalleled composability. Developers can query existing public subgraphs, forking and customizing them for new use cases. This matters for protocols that need to integrate with or build upon established DeFi primitives and data sets.
1,000+
Live Subgraphs
03
Con: Vendor Lock-in to EVM
Architectural limitation for multi-chain apps: The Graph's design is intrinsically tied to EVM execution logs and block structures. Indexing non-EVM chains (e.g., Solana, Cosmos app-chains, Bitcoin L2s) requires significant, often impractical, adaptation. This matters for protocols with a multi-chain future or those evaluating non-EVM ecosystems like Solana's Sealevel runtime or Cosmos IBC.
04
Con: Missed Heterogeneous Data Opportunities
Cannot natively unify cross-ecosystem data: A dApp needing aggregated data from Ethereum, Solana, and Cosmos would require maintaining separate, incompatible indexing pipelines. This increases engineering overhead and fragments data logic. This matters for analytics platforms, cross-chain DeFi aggregators, or wallets that need a unified view of user activity across all chains.
pros-cons-b
Chain Support Strategy
Custom Indexers (Multi-Chain): Pros and Cons
Choosing between indexing only EVM chains versus heterogeneous networks (EVM, Cosmos, Solana) is a foundational architectural decision. This comparison outlines the key trade-offs in development velocity, operational complexity, and market reach.
01
Indexing EVM Chains Only
Pros:
- Development Velocity: Single SDK (e.g., The Graph Subgraph, Subsquid) and consistent RPC methods (eth_getLogs) across all chains. A team can deploy the same indexer logic to Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Polygon in hours.
- Operational Simplicity: Unified infrastructure stack (EVM node clients like Geth/Erigon, block explorers). Monitoring and alerting are standardized.
- Cons:
- Market Limitation: Excludes major ecosystems like Solana (Sealevel VM), Cosmos (IBC-enabled zones), and Bitcoin L2s, potentially missing 40%+ of Total Value Locked (TVL) outside EVM.
- Protocol Risk: Over-reliance on a single virtual machine paradigm; architectural shifts in the EVM landscape affect your entire stack.
02
Indexing Heterogeneous Chains
Pros:
- Maximized Protocol Coverage: Access data from all major ecosystems—EVM (Ethereum), CosmWasm (Osmosis), SVM (Solana), and Move (Aptos). Essential for cross-chain analytics platforms like Nansen or DeFiLlama.
- Future-Proofing: Architectural flexibility to onboard new, non-EVM chains (e.g., Monad, Berachain) without a complete rewrite.
- Cons:
- Exponential Complexity: Requires expertise in multiple execution environments, data models (Solana's account vs. EVM's log-based), and consensus mechanisms. Development time can increase 3-5x.
- Fragmented Tooling: No universal SDK. Must integrate chain-specific tools: Cosmos SDK indexers, Solana Geyser plugins, and Aptos Indexer, leading to higher maintenance overhead.
03
Choose EVM-Only For...
Specific Use Cases:
- Internal DeFi Dashboard: Tracking user positions across EVM-based lending protocols (Aave, Compound) and DEXs (Uniswap, Curve).
- EVM-Native Protocol: If your dApp (e.g., a perpetual futures platform) is deployed solely on EVM rollups (Arbitrum, Optimism, Base).
- Resource-Constrained Teams: Startups or projects with < 5 engineers where speed to market and focused expertise are critical.
~60%
of DeFi TVL
1 SDK
Unified Tooling
04
Choose Heterogeneous For...
Specific Use Cases:
- Cross-Chain Portfolio Manager: Aggregating user assets from Ethereum, Solana (via Jupiter), and Cosmos (via Osmosis) in a single view.
- Institutional Data Product: Selling indexed on-chain data feeds to hedge funds requiring coverage of all major L1s and L2s.
- Infrastructure-as-a-Service: Building a generalized indexer API (like Covalent or Goldsky) for developers across multiple ecosystems.
100%
Chain Coverage
3-5x
Dev Complexity
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Approach
Indexing EVM Chains Only for DeFi
Verdict: The pragmatic, battle-tested choice for established protocols. Strengths: Deep compatibility with the dominant DeFi stack: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, and Polygon. Tools like The Graph, Covalent, and Goldsky offer mature subgraph/API ecosystems. Seamless integration with ERC-20, ERC-4626, and Uniswap V3 standards. Ideal for protocols like Aave, Compound, and Uniswap that prioritize security and composability over chain diversity.
Indexing Heterogeneous Chains for DeFi
Verdict: Essential for cross-chain strategies and yield aggregation. Strengths: Unlocks data from high-throughput, low-fee chains like Solana (e.g., Jupiter, Raydium) and app-chains in Cosmos (e.g., Osmosis, dYdX Chain). Critical for building cross-chain aggregators, portfolio dashboards (like DeFi Llama), or risk engines that monitor positions across EVM, CosmWasm, and Sealevel runtimes. Requires handling multiple RPC standards and indexing paradigms.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between a focused EVM-only indexer and a heterogeneous solution is a foundational architectural decision with long-term implications.
Indexing EVM Chains Only excels at developer velocity and operational simplicity because it leverages a single, unified development stack (Solidity/Vyper, RPC calls, event schemas). For example, building on The Graph's Subgraph standard for Ethereum and its L2s (Arbitrum, Base, Polygon) allows for rapid deployment with minimal code changes, supported by a massive ecosystem of tools like Hardhat and Foundry. This focus translates to lower initial engineering overhead and faster time-to-market for applications like DeFi protocols (e.g., Uniswap, Aave) that primarily operate within the EVM universe.
Indexing Heterogeneous Chains (EVM, Cosmos, Solana) takes a different approach by prioritizing maximum protocol reach and future-proofing. This results in a significant trade-off: you gain the ability to serve cross-chain applications—such as a portfolio aggregator tracking assets on Ethereum, Solana ($70B+ TVL), and Cosmos appchains (Osmosis, Injective)—but at the cost of maintaining multiple, disparate indexing pipelines. Each ecosystem (e.g., Solana's Sealevel runtime, Cosmos' ABCI) requires specialized knowledge, tooling, and data normalization, increasing complexity and demanding a broader, more expensive engineering skill set.
The key trade-off: If your priority is cost-effective, rapid development for a known EVM-centric product with a clear roadmap on chains like Ethereum and its scaling solutions, choose a dedicated EVM indexer. If you prioritize building a foundational data layer for a multi-chain future or your product's core value (e.g., cross-chain bridge analytics, universal NFT marketplace) depends on aggregating data from architecturally diverse chains, the initial complexity of a heterogeneous indexing strategy is a necessary and strategic investment.
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