Chainstack excels at providing a hybrid, multi-cloud architecture because its platform is cloud-agnostic, allowing deployments on AWS, Google Cloud, and Azure. This results in superior deployment flexibility and data sovereignty for enterprises with strict compliance needs. For example, its dedicated nodes offer predictable 99.9%+ SLA uptime and can be provisioned in private, compliant environments, a critical feature for financial institutions or projects like Polygon Supernets and Avalanche Subnets.
LABS
Comparisons
Chainstack vs Infura: Hybrid & Enterprise Infrastructure
A technical comparison for CTOs and architects evaluating enterprise-grade blockchain infrastructure. We analyze dedicated nodes, hybrid deployments, security features, compliance, and total cost of ownership to determine the optimal platform for high-stakes applications.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Enterprise Infrastructure Dilemma
Choosing between Chainstack and Infura requires understanding a fundamental trade-off between specialized, multi-cloud flexibility and battle-tested, ecosystem-integrated scale.
Infura takes a different approach by leveraging a massive, consolidated infrastructure optimized for developer velocity and ecosystem integration. This results in unparalleled ease of use and deep tooling with the Ethereum and IPFS ecosystems, but with less control over the underlying cloud provider. Its free tier and seamless integration with MetaMask, Truffle, and Hardhat have made it the default for thousands of dApps, supporting over 1.3 trillion requests in 2023 alone.
The key trade-off: If your priority is infrastructure control, multi-cloud strategy, or regulatory compliance, choose Chainstack. If you prioritize rapid prototyping, deep Ethereum/IPFS tooling integration, and minimizing initial setup complexity, choose Infura.
tldr-summary
Chainstack vs. Infura
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A data-driven breakdown of core strengths and trade-offs for enterprise infrastructure decisions.
01
Chainstack: Multi-Cloud & Hybrid Flexibility
Deploy nodes across AWS, GCP, Azure, or on-premises. This matters for enterprises with existing cloud commitments or strict data sovereignty requirements. Offers a true hybrid model, not just a managed service.
02
Infura: Scale & Ecosystem Integration
Processes over 13 trillion requests annually with deep integrations into the MetaMask, Truffle, and Hardhat toolchains. This matters for mass-scale consumer dApps that require battle-tested reliability and seamless developer experience.
03
Chainstack: Transparent, Predictable Pricing
Pay-as-you-go and fixed-rate plans with no surprise metering. Enterprise plans offer custom SLAs and dedicated support. This matters for budget-conscious teams and projects with predictable, high-volume traffic.
04
Infura: Premium Network Access & APIs
Exclusive early access to new L2s and networks (e.g., Base, Linea) via the Consensys stack. Offers advanced APIs like the Debug & Trace API. This matters for protocols needing first-mover advantage on emerging chains.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Chainstack vs Infura: Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for enterprise blockchain infrastructure.
| Metric / Feature | Chainstack | Infura |
|---|---|---|
Multi-Protocol Support (EVM, Non-EVM) | ||
Dedicated Node Pricing (Monthly) | $399+ | Enterprise Only |
Public RPC Rate Limit (Requests/sec) | 200 | 100,000 |
Enterprise SLA Guarantee | 99.95% | 99.9% |
On-Premise/Private Cloud Deployment | ||
Free Tier Daily Requests | 3,000,000 | 100,000 |
Supported Chains (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, etc.) | 30+ | 15+ |
CHAINSTACK VS INFURA
Performance & Reliability Benchmarks
Direct comparison of enterprise-grade blockchain node infrastructure metrics.
| Metric | Chainstack | Infura |
|---|---|---|
Global Edge Network Locations | 40+ | 15+ |
Guaranteed SLA Uptime | 99.9% | 99.9% |
Max Requests per Second (RPS) | 10,000+ | Unpublished |
Archive Data Availability | ||
Hybrid Deployment (On-prem/Cloud) | ||
Dedicated Node Setup Time | < 1 hour | 1-3 days |
Multi-Protocol Support (EVM, Solana, etc.) |
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Platform
Chainstack for DeFi & DEXs
Verdict: The superior choice for high-throughput, multi-chain DeFi applications. Strengths: Offers dedicated, load-balanced nodes with predictable, enterprise-grade SLAs (99.9%+ uptime). Essential for protocols like Uniswap, Aave, or Compound that require consistent, low-latency access to state data and mempool streaming. Its WebSocket support and archive data are critical for building real-time dashboards and arbitrage bots. The ability to deploy nodes across AWS, GCP, and Azure provides resilience against regional outages. Key Metric: Supports over 30 chains, including Ethereum, Arbitrum, Polygon PoS, and Base, allowing a single API to manage liquidity across ecosystems.
Infura for DeFi & DEXs
Verdict: A reliable, fast-start option for Ethereum-centric projects, but can become costly and limiting at scale. Strengths: The de facto standard for Ethereum development, offering instant access to the mainnet and major L2s. The free tier is excellent for prototyping. For established projects, the Transactions API simplifies sending complex transactions. However, rate limits on higher tiers and lack of true dedicated node guarantees can be a bottleneck for high-frequency trading applications or protocols with massive user bases. Trade-off: Ease of use vs. customizability and cost predictability at enterprise scale.
pros-cons-a
Hybrid & Enterprise Infrastructure
Chainstack: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs choosing between Chainstack and Infura for production-grade node services.
01
Chainstack Pro: Multi-Cloud & Hybrid Deployments
Architecture flexibility: Deploy nodes on AWS, Google Cloud, Azure, or your own bare metal. This matters for enterprise compliance (data sovereignty, air-gapped environments) and cost optimization by leveraging existing cloud credits or on-premise hardware.
02
Chainstack Pro: Dedicated Node Performance
Guaranteed resources: Full node instances with dedicated RAM, CPU, and SSD. This delivers consistent sub-2-second latency and zero noisy neighbor risk, critical for high-frequency dApps, arbitrage bots, and real-time indexers like The Graph.
03
Infura Pro: Breadth of Networks & Scale
Protocol coverage: Access to over 15 networks (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, Optimism, Base) via a single API key. This matters for multi-chain protocols (e.g., Aave, Uniswap) and developers who need to rapidly prototype across ecosystems without managing infrastructure.
04
Infura Pro: Developer Tooling & Ecosystem
Deep integrations: Native plugins for Hardhat, Truffle, and MetaMask. This provides a faster onboarding path for EVM developers and reduces integration time, as seen with major wallets and tools that default to Infura endpoints.
05
Chainstack Con: Higher Management Overhead
Infrastructure as Code (IaC) required: While flexible, managing multi-cloud deployments demands expertise in Terraform or Kubernetes. This adds operational complexity vs. Infura's fully-managed service, a trade-off for control.
06
Infura Con: Shared Resource Limitations
Rate-limited tiers: Free and growth plans have strict request/sec limits and shared node resources. This can lead to throttling during peak loads (e.g., NFT mints, market volatility), impacting user experience for scaling dApps.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
Chainstack vs Infura: Hybrid & Enterprise Infrastructure
Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs evaluating enterprise-grade RPC providers.
03
Chainstack Con: Smaller Market Share
While growing, Chainstack's Total Value Secured (TVS) and public node count are lower than Infura's. This can be a perceived risk for protocols prioritizing the most proven, widely adopted infrastructure with the largest shared global load balancer.
04
Infura Con: Centralization & Rate Limit Concerns
Single-point-of-failure risk due to Consensys ownership and shared infrastructure. Public tier has strict rate limits (100k req/day). Enterprise plans required for dedicated endpoints and SLA-backed throughput, increasing cost for scaling projects.
CHAINSTACK VS INFURA
Technical Deep Dive: Architecture & Security
A technical comparison of Chainstack's hybrid infrastructure and Infura's enterprise-grade services, focusing on architectural models, security postures, and performance guarantees for mission-critical applications.
Yes, Chainstack's hybrid architecture offers a more decentralized path. While both providers operate centralized managed services, Chainstack uniquely provides tools for deploying and connecting to your own dedicated nodes, reducing reliance on their public endpoints. Infura, owned by ConsenSys, primarily offers access to its large, shared node clusters. For projects prioritizing censorship resistance and infrastructure sovereignty, Chainstack's model provides a clearer migration path to self-hosting or a hybrid setup using services like AWS, Google Cloud, or your own data centers.
CHAINSTACK VS INFURA: HYBRID & ENTERPRISE INFRASTRUCTURE
Total Cost of Ownership Analysis
Direct comparison of key metrics, features, and costs for enterprise-grade node infrastructure.
| Metric / Feature | Chainstack | Infura |
|---|---|---|
Enterprise SLA Guarantee | ||
Hybrid Node Architecture | ||
Dedicated Node Cost (Monthly, Ethereum) | $1,500 - $5,000+ | $2,000 - $6,000+ |
Public Node Rate Limit (Requests/sec) | 100 | 100 |
Archive Data Access | Included | Add-on Fee |
Multi-Cloud Provider Support | ||
On-Premise Deployment Option | ||
Supported Chains (Count) | 30+ | 15+ |
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
A data-driven breakdown to guide your infrastructure choice based on protocol needs, team size, and risk tolerance.
Chainstack excels at providing a flexible, multi-cloud and multi-protocol foundation for teams building complex, production-grade applications. Its core strength is a hybrid architecture that allows deployment across AWS, Google Cloud, and Azure, offering superior geographic control and data sovereignty. For enterprises with strict compliance needs or those running high-throughput DeFi protocols like Aave or Uniswap V3, this control is critical. Chainstack's transparent, usage-based pricing and dedicated node options provide predictable scaling, a key metric for budgeting CTOs.
Infura takes a different approach by offering a massively scaled, fully-managed service optimized for developer velocity and Ethereum ecosystem integration. This results in a trade-off: unparalleled ease of use and reliability for mainstream EVM chains (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum) at the cost of infrastructure transparency. Its free tier and seamless integration with MetaMask and Truffle make it the default for rapid prototyping and applications where 99.9%+ uptime on public endpoints is the priority over custom configurations.
The key architectural trade-off is control versus convenience. Chainstack gives you the keys to your node's cloud, chain, and configuration. Infura provides a turn-key, optimized highway to the blockchain. Your team's expertise and application requirements dictate the choice.
Consider Chainstack if your needs include: Hybrid or private cloud deployments, multi-chain support beyond core EVM (e.g., Avalanche, NEAR, Solana), dedicated node performance for sub-second finality, or stringent data residency requirements (GDPR, HIPAA). It's the choice for protocol architects building the next Layer 2 or an enterprise minting millions of NFTs.
Choose Infura when your priorities are: Maximizing developer productivity on Ethereum and major Layer 2s, requiring absolute operational simplicity with a massive free tier, or building consumer dApps where Infura's brand recognition and wallet integrations reduce friction. It remains the benchmark for reliable, hands-off RPC access.
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