NOWNodes excels at predictable, flat-rate pricing for historical data access because of its simple, tiered subscription model. For example, its 'PRO' plan offers unlimited archive data requests for a fixed $299/month, providing clear budget control for projects like DeFi analytics platforms that require heavy historical querying. This contrasts with usage-based models where costs can scale unpredictably with user growth or data-intensive operations.
LABS
Comparisons
NOWNodes vs Infura: Historical Data Access Fees
A technical and cost analysis of NOWNodes and Infura for accessing deep historical blockchain states. This comparison is critical for analytics platforms, on-chain indexers, and auditing tools with significant data query volumes.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Cost of Blockchain History
A data-driven comparison of NOWNodes and Infura's pricing models for accessing historical blockchain data.
Infura takes a different approach with its consumption-based pricing, charging per compute unit (CU) for archive data. This results in a trade-off: it can be more cost-effective for low-volume, sporadic access (e.g., a wallet app checking a user's old transaction), but costs become opaque and can spike during high-demand periods like NFT minting events or major protocol upgrades, making budget forecasting difficult.
The key trade-off: If your priority is cost predictability and high-volume historical analysis (e.g., building a blockchain explorer or backtesting trading strategies), choose NOWNodes. If you prioritize paying only for what you use with low initial volume and value seamless integration with the broader Ethereum ecosystem (like MetaMask or Truffle), choose Infura.
tldr-summary
NOWNodes vs Infura: Historical Data Access Fees
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A direct comparison of pricing models for accessing historical blockchain data. Choose based on your project's data depth, chain coverage, and budget predictability.
01
NOWNodes: Predictable, Flat-Rate Pricing
Fixed monthly cost: Access to full historical data is included in standard API plans, starting at $29/month. This provides cost certainty for projects with high-volume historical queries, like on-chain analytics dashboards or tax reporting tools. No surprise overage fees for deep data dives.
$29+
Starting Price /mo
02
NOWNodes: Extensive Chain Support
Broad network coverage: Supports historical data access for 80+ blockchains in a single plan, including Ethereum, BSC, Polygon, and many Layer 2s. This is a major advantage for multi-chain dApps or data aggregators that need a unified, cost-effective source for historical queries across diverse ecosystems.
80+
Blockchains
03
Infura: Pay-As-You-Go Complexity
Usage-based billing: Historical data requests (e.g., eth_getLogs, trace_* methods) consume Compute Units (CUs). Costs scale directly with query complexity and data volume, which can lead to unpredictable bills for data-intensive applications. Requires careful monitoring to avoid budget overruns.
Variable
Cost per Query
04
Infura: Enterprise-Grade Depth & Reliability
Deep archival data and advanced traces: Offers access to full archival nodes and Ethereum execution traces (via the Trace API), which are essential for sophisticated analysis, debugging, and forensic applications. This level of data granularity is critical for protocol developers, auditors, and advanced DeFi platforms requiring maximum transparency.
Full Archive
Data Depth
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
NOWNodes vs Infura: Historical Data Access Fees
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for historical blockchain data access.
| Metric | NOWNodes | Infura |
|---|---|---|
Historical Data Pricing Model | Free Tier + Fixed Monthly Plans | Pay-as-you-go (per request) |
Free Tier Historical Calls | Up to 1M requests/month | Up to 100,000 requests/day |
Archive Node Access Cost | Included in paid plans | Additional $250/month add-on |
Historical Block Range Query | Full history on all plans | Limited by plan tier |
Ethereum Archive Data via RPC | ||
Multi-Chain Historical Support | 80+ chains | EVM chains + select others |
Data Export/Download Tools |
NOWNodes vs Infura
Historical Data Access Cost Comparison
Direct comparison of pricing and limits for accessing historical blockchain data via API.
| Metric | NOWNodes | Infura |
|---|---|---|
Historical Data (Free Tier) | 100,000 requests/day | 100,000 compute units/day |
Archive Data Access (Paid) | From $29/month | From $250/month |
Ethereum Archive Calls (Cost) | $0.0005 per request | $0.00025 per compute unit |
Multi-Blockchain Support | ||
Free Tier Rate Limits | 5 requests/sec | N/A (compute-based) |
Custom Node Deployment | ||
Pay-As-You-Go Billing |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
NOWNodes vs Infura: Historical Data Access Fees
Key strengths and trade-offs for developers building applications requiring deep historical blockchain data.
01
NOWNodes Pro: Predictable, Flat-Rate Pricing
Specific advantage: Single-tier pricing at $29/month for unlimited historical API calls across 80+ blockchains. This matters for budget-conscious teams building data-intensive dApps, as it eliminates cost uncertainty from variable query volumes.
02
NOWNodes Con: Limited Advanced Data Endpoints
Specific limitation: Primarily offers standard JSON-RPC methods (e.g., eth_getBlockByNumber). Lacks specialized historical APIs for complex analytics like token flow analysis or smart contract event decoding at scale, which may require additional data processing.
03
Infura Pro: Rich, Specialized Historical APIs
Specific advantage: Offers the Enhanced APIs suite, including eth_getLogs with advanced filtering and the Transaction Data API for decoded event logs. This matters for DeFi protocols and analytics platforms needing granular, out-of-the-box historical insights without building parsers.
04
Infura Con: Complex, Usage-Based Fee Structure
Specific limitation: Historical data calls via Enhanced APIs consume from a separate Compute Unit (CU) quota. Costs scale with query complexity and volume, creating unpredictable bills for applications with heavy historical data ingestion, unlike flat-rate alternatives.
pros-cons-b
NOWNodes vs Infura: Historical Data Access Fees
Infura: Pros and Cons for Historical Data
Key strengths and trade-offs for historical data retrieval at a glance. Evaluate based on cost structure, data depth, and API flexibility.
01
Infura Pro: Enterprise-Grade Reliability
Guaranteed data integrity and uptime: Backed by ConsenSys, Infura provides 99.9%+ SLA for its archive nodes. This matters for dApps requiring absolute consistency in historical state queries, such as on-chain analytics dashboards or audit tools that cannot tolerate data gaps.
99.9%
Uptime SLA
03
Infura Con: Opaque, Usage-Based Pricing
Costs scale unpredictably with data volume: Historical queries, especially eth_getLogs for event filtering, consume large Compute Units (CUs). This matters for high-frequency data backfilling or indexing projects, where a single complex query can incur significant, unpredictable fees compared to flat-rate alternatives.
04
Infura Con: Limited Blockchain Coverage
Primarily focused on Ethereum and a few L2s: While supporting Ethereum, Polygon, and Optimism, it lacks direct access to many newer L1s and niche chains. This matters for cross-chain analytics platforms or protocols that need historical data from chains like BNB Smart Chain, TON, or Solana, forcing a multi-provider setup.
05
NOWNodes Pro: Transparent, Flat-Rate Pricing
Predictable costs with unlimited requests: Offers fixed monthly plans (e.g., $99/month) for full archive node access. This matters for bootstrapped projects or data-intensive applications like block explorers and arbitrage bots that require heavy historical scanning without surprise invoices.
$99/mo
Starter Archive Plan
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
NOWNodes for Cost-Conscious Devs
Verdict: The clear choice for predictable, low-cost historical queries. Strengths: NOWNodes offers a fixed-fee model with unlimited historical data access on its paid plans (starting at ~$29/month). This is ideal for applications like Dune Analytics dashboards, on-chain forensics tools, or compliance reporting that require heavy, repeated queries of past blocks and transactions without variable, usage-based surprises. Their Archive Node API provides full historical depth across 80+ blockchains at a flat rate. Trade-offs: The fixed model can be less optimal for applications with highly sporadic, low-volume query patterns where a pay-per-call model might be cheaper.
Infura for Cost-Conscious Devs
Verdict: Potentially expensive for sustained historical analysis; better for mixed workloads. Strengths: Infura's Archive Data Add-On provides deep history but operates on a usage-based credit system. For teams with bursty, unpredictable query needs or those already using Infura for primary JSON-RPC calls, bundling can simplify billing. Their Ethereum and Polygon archive access is robust. Trade-offs: Costs scale directly with Compute Units (CUs) consumed. High-frequency historical scanning for projects like NFT rarity bots or DeFi yield strategy backtesting can lead to significant, unpredictable monthly bills compared to a fixed fee.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between NOWNodes and Infura for historical data access is a strategic decision balancing cost predictability against ecosystem depth.
NOWNodes excels at providing predictable, transparent pricing for historical data access. Its flat-fee model, with plans like the $299/month 'Business' tier offering unlimited archive calls, is ideal for projects with high-volume, predictable query patterns. This eliminates the surprise costs associated with per-request billing, a critical factor for CTOs managing a fixed infrastructure budget. For example, a protocol performing daily analytics across the entire Ethereum history can forecast its monthly spend with certainty.
Infura takes a different approach by bundling historical data access within its broader, usage-based pricing tiers (e.g., the $250/month 'Growth' plan includes 500,000 Compute Units daily). This strategy results in a powerful trade-off: you gain seamless, integrated access to a vast ecosystem of tools, enhanced APIs, and superior multi-chain support, but at the cost of less granular cost control for pure historical queries. Your bill scales directly with your application's overall activity.
The key trade-off: If your priority is cost predictability and high-volume, dedicated historical queries for analytics or indexing, choose NOWNodes. If you prioritize deep ecosystem integration, advanced API features, and a unified endpoint for both real-time and historical data across multiple chains like Ethereum, Polygon, and Arbitrum, choose Infura. For a CTO, the decision hinges on whether historical data is a standalone cost center or an integrated component of a broader, dynamic application stack.
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