The Graph excels at serving complex, historical queries by indexing blockchain data into easily queryable subgraphs. This model is optimized for applications that need to aggregate, filter, and search vast amounts of on-chain history without hitting node RPC limits. For example, a DeFi dashboard showing a user's entire transaction history across thousands of Uniswap V3 pools relies on The Graph's indexed data, avoiding the prohibitive cost and latency of scanning the chain directly.
LABS
Comparisons
The Graph vs Alchemy: Indexed Querying vs Real-Time State
A technical analysis comparing The Graph's decentralized indexing protocol for historical queries with Alchemy's managed RPC services for real-time state access. For CTOs and architects choosing core data infrastructure.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: Two Different Data Access Models
A foundational look at the architectural divergence between The Graph's historical indexing and Alchemy's real-time node infrastructure.
Alchemy takes a different approach by providing direct, low-latency access to real-time blockchain state via enhanced node infrastructure. This results in a trade-off: you gain millisecond-level access to the latest block data, mempool transactions, and smart contract state, but complex historical queries require custom indexing logic. Alchemy's Supernode architecture powers real-time applications like NFT minting bots and high-frequency DEX arbitrage, where seeing the next block first is the priority.
The key trade-off: If your priority is complex historical data aggregation (e.g., analytics, user history, governance reporting), choose The Graph. If you prioritize real-time state access and transaction execution (e.g., wallets, trading bots, live dashboards), choose Alchemy. Many sophisticated protocols, like Uniswap and Aave, use both: Alchemy for core protocol operations and The Graph for their front-end analytics.
tldr-summary
The Graph vs Alchemy
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance. Choose based on your data access pattern: historical, aggregated queries vs. real-time, low-latency state.
01
The Graph: For Historical & Aggregated Data
Optimized for complex queries: Indexes and pre-aggregates blockchain data into custom subgraphs (e.g., Uniswap trading volume, NFT collection stats). This matters for analytics dashboards, on-chain research, and applications needing to query large historical datasets without heavy client-side processing.
1,000+
Deployed Subgraphs
02
The Graph: Decentralized Network
Censorship-resistant infrastructure: Relies on a decentralized network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators, secured by the GRT token. This matters for protocols prioritizing data integrity and neutrality, avoiding reliance on a single API provider. However, introduces coordination overhead vs. a managed service.
200+
Active Indexers
03
Alchemy: For Real-Time State & Transactions
Optimized for live chain state: Provides direct, low-latency access to the latest block data, transaction simulation, and enhanced APIs (e.g., alchemy_getTokenBalances). This matters for wallets, DEX aggregators, and real-time applications where sub-second response times are critical.
99.9%
Uptime SLA
04
Alchemy: Managed Web3 Suite
Full-stack developer platform: Bundles core node RPC, enhanced APIs, notification webhooks (Notify), and debugging tools (Debug/Trace) into a single, reliable service. This matters for engineering teams wanting a "batteries-included" provider to simplify infrastructure and accelerate development on Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum, etc.
10+
Supported Chains
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
The Graph vs Alchemy: Indexed Querying vs Real-Time State
Direct comparison of decentralized indexing and full-node API services for blockchain data access.
| Metric / Feature | The Graph (Indexed Querying) | Alchemy (Real-Time State) |
|---|---|---|
Primary Data Model | Historical, indexed subgraphs | Live blockchain state |
Query Latency (P95) | < 100 ms | < 50 ms |
Data Freshness | Indexed (seconds to minutes) | Real-time (new block) |
Decentralized Network | ||
Free Tier Queries/Day | ~100,000 | ~300 million compute units |
Core Service | GraphQL API for custom data | JSON-RPC (eth_call, logs) |
Ideal For | DApp frontends, analytics dashboards | Smart contract backends, wallets |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
The Graph vs Alchemy: Indexed Querying vs Real-Time State
Key architectural trade-offs and decision drivers for CTOs choosing a data infrastructure layer.
01
The Graph: Decentralized Indexing
Subgraph-based historical queries: Indexes blockchain data into GraphQL APIs, enabling complex, aggregated queries (e.g., "total DEX volume for Uniswap v3 on Arbitrum last month"). This matters for analytics dashboards, on-chain research, and applications requiring historical aggregation without running a full node.
02
The Graph: Protocol Economics
Censorship-resistant data layer: Relies on a decentralized network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators, secured by the GRT token. This matters for protocols prioritizing data verifiability and avoiding single-point-of-failure dependencies, aligning with DeFi and DAO governance models.
03
Alchemy: Real-Time Node Access
High-performance node RPCs: Provides ultra-reliable, low-latency connections to the latest chain state (< 100ms p95 latency). This matters for wallets, NFT mints, and DeFi front-ends where immediate transaction submission and real-time balance checks are critical.
04
Alchemy: Enhanced APIs & Tooling
Bundled developer suite: Offers NFT API, Transfers API, Webhooks, and Notify services atop core RPCs. This matters for teams wanting a single vendor for multiple data needs (e.g., building an NFT marketplace) to accelerate development and reduce integration complexity.
05
The Graph: Development Overhead
Subgraph deployment and curation: Requires writing and maintaining a subgraph manifest (AssemblyScript), which adds complexity and time. This is a trade-off for teams without dedicated data engineering resources or those needing instant data access.
06
Alchemy: Centralized Service Model
Vendor lock-in and uptime dependency: A managed service with 99.9%+ SLA, but introduces a centralized point of control. This is a trade-off for protocols where decentralization is a core non-negotiable, as seen in many L1/L2 foundational stacks.
pros-cons-b
The Graph vs Alchemy
Alchemy: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs between decentralized indexing and centralized infrastructure APIs.
02
The Graph: Community Curation
Open data marketplace: Anyone can publish and query public subgraphs (e.g., Uniswap, Aave). This matters for composability and transparency, allowing developers to build on vetted, community-maintained data sets without vendor lock-in.
04
Alchemy: Developer Tooling Suite
Integrated product stack: Bundles core RPC, NFT API (supports ERC-721/1155), Transfers API, and SDKs. This matters for teams wanting a single vendor for core infrastructure, reducing integration complexity and accelerating time-to-market for consumer apps.
05
The Graph: Potential Latency & Cost
Decentralized trade-offs: Query performance depends on Indexer selection and network congestion. For complex queries, response times can be slower than centralized alternatives. This matters for real-time applications where sub-second consistency is critical.
06
Alchemy: Centralized Dependency
Vendor risk: Your application's availability is tied to Alchemy's service level. While highly reliable, it introduces a central point of failure versus The Graph's decentralized network. This matters for protocols prioritizing censorship resistance and infrastructure decentralization.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Which: A Scenario-Based Guide
The Graph for DeFi
Verdict: The default for historical analytics and complex, aggregated queries. Strengths: Unmatched for querying historical data across multiple contracts (e.g., Uniswap v2/v3, Aave pools). Subgraphs provide a standardized, open API for on-chain data like trading volumes, liquidity provider yields, and governance voting history. Essential for dashboards, analytics pages, and yield optimizers that need to process weeks or months of event data. Consideration: Indexing lag (minutes to hours) means it's not for real-time trading logic.
Alchemy for DeFi
Verdict: The backbone for real-time state and transaction execution.
Strengths: Provides immediate access to the latest block state, pending mempool transactions, and enhanced APIs like alchemy_getTokenBalances. Critical for building live price oracles, liquidation engines, and front-ends that display real-time wallet balances. Superior reliability and WebSocket support for instant updates.
Consideration: Complex historical queries (e.g., "total fees earned per pool last month") require significant client-side processing.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
A data-driven breakdown to guide your infrastructure choice between historical indexing and real-time node access.
The Graph excels at cost-efficient, historical querying because its decentralized network of Indexers pre-processes and serves indexed blockchain data. For example, querying a year's worth of Uniswap V3 swap events for analytics is significantly faster and cheaper via a subgraph API than through direct node calls, with queries often costing fractions of a cent in GRT. Its strength lies in serving complex, aggregated historical data for dApps like Uniswap, Aave, and Lido.
Alchemy takes a different approach by providing high-performance, real-time access to node state. This results in superior reliability and speed for live chain interactions—critical for wallet balances, transaction broadcasting, and real-time NFT mint tracking. Alchemy's Supernode infrastructure boasts >99.9% uptime and powers over $105B in on-chain transaction volume, making it the backbone for real-time operations in protocols like OpenSea, 0x, and MetaMask.
The key architectural trade-off is between pre-computed data (The Graph) and direct state access (Alchemy). The Graph optimizes for read-heavy applications analyzing past events, while Alchemy optimizes for write-heavy applications interacting with the present chain state.
Consider The Graph if your primary need is: Complex historical queries, data aggregation across many blocks, or building a dApp dashboard. Its ecosystem of subgraphs for major protocols like Compound or Arbitrum can save months of development time.
Choose Alchemy when your priority is: Ultra-reliable node RPCs, real-time state reads/writes, or access to specialized APIs like NFT or Transfers. Its robust infrastructure is non-negotiable for core transactional functions and high-frequency trading applications.
For enterprise-scale projects, the decision is often 'and', not 'or'. Leading dApps like Aave use Alchemy for real-time liquidity provisioning and transaction submission, while simultaneously leveraging The Graph for historical analytics and protocol governance dashboards. Allocate your budget based on which function—real-time operations or historical insight—is more critical to your MVP and user experience.
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