QuickNode excels at predictable, usage-based pricing with a clear path for high-volume projects. Its tiered plans offer dedicated resources and transparent overage fees, which is crucial for protocols like Aave or Uniswap that require consistent, high-request throughput. For example, their Enterprise tier provides dedicated nodes with 99.9% SLA and custom request limits, directly linking cost to proven infrastructure needs.
LABS
Comparisons
QuickNode vs Alchemy: Subscription Tiers
An analytical breakdown of QuickNode and Alchemy's commercial models, focusing on fixed-tier subscriptions versus scalable growth plans for projects with $500K+ infrastructure budgets.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The RPC Pricing Dilemma for Scaling Projects
Choosing between QuickNode and Alchemy's subscription tiers is a critical cost and performance decision for scaling Web3 applications.
Alchemy takes a different approach with its usage-based Supercharged tier, which offers a massive free tier and pay-as-you-go pricing for compute units. This results in flexibility for startups and applications with spiky traffic patterns, like NFT minting events on OpenSea. However, the trade-off is less predictable monthly costs at scale compared to fixed-tier models, as compute unit consumption can vary significantly.
The key trade-off: If your priority is cost predictability and dedicated resources for a high, steady request volume, choose QuickNode. If you prioritize initial flexibility, a generous free tier, and granular pay-per-use billing for variable workloads, choose Alchemy.
tldr-summary
QuickNode vs Alchemy
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs for enterprise infrastructure decisions.
01
QuickNode: Global Infrastructure Edge
Specific advantage: 30+ independent global clusters vs. Alchemy's 3-5 major regions. This matters for low-latency applications like high-frequency trading bots or global gaming platforms requiring sub-100ms response times from specific geographies.
30+
Global Clusters
03
QuickNode: Granular Billing & Cost Predictability
Specific advantage: Pay-per-request pricing on all plans, including Enterprise. This matters for projects with variable or unpredictable traffic (e.g., NFT mints, event-driven protocols) where you only pay for what you use, avoiding over-provisioning and surprise bills.
04
Alchemy: Unmatched Ecosystem & Protocol Support
Specific advantage: Deep, first-party integrations with EVM L2s (Arbitrum, Optimism, Base), Solana, and Starknet. This matters for protocols deploying multi-chain who need reliable, optimized RPC endpoints and dedicated support for emerging ecosystems beyond Ethereum mainnet.
15+
Supported Chains
05
QuickNode: Advanced Data & Archive Access
Specific advantage: Full archive data available on all paid plans, with Trace API for debugging complex transactions. This matters for analytics platforms, block explorers, and DeFi risk engines that require historical state access and deep transaction simulation.
06
Alchemy: Robust Reliability & Monitoring
Specific advantage: Proven >99.9% SLA with sophisticated Supernode architecture and granular performance dashboards. This matters for mission-critical financial applications (CEXs, institutional DeFi) where uptime is non-negotiable and performance deviations must be caught instantly.
>99.9%
Uptime SLA
QUICKNODE VS ALCHEMY
Head-to-Head: Subscription Tier Feature Matrix
Direct comparison of core infrastructure features and pricing tiers for enterprise blockchain RPC providers.
| Metric / Feature | QuickNode | Alchemy |
|---|---|---|
Starting Price (Growth Tier) | $49/month | $49/month |
Free Tier Requests/Day | 0 | 300 million compute units |
Archive Data Access (Growth Tier) | ||
Max Requests/Second (Growth Tier) | 150 | 330 |
Dedicated Endpoints (Growth Tier) | ||
WebSocket Support | ||
Enhanced APIs (e.g., NFT, Transfers) | ||
Multi-Chain Support (EVM + Non-EVM) |
COST ANALYSIS: PREDICTABLE TIERS VS. USAGE-BASED SCALING
QuickNode vs Alchemy: Subscription Tiers
Direct comparison of pricing models, rate limits, and included features for enterprise blockchain infrastructure.
| Metric | QuickNode | Alchemy |
|---|---|---|
Pricing Model | Fixed-Tier Subscriptions | Usage-Based (Compute Units) |
Entry Plan Price | $49/month | $0/month (Pay-As-You-Go) |
Entry Plan Requests/Day | 150,000 | 300 Million Compute Units |
Enterprise Plan Starting Price | $999/month | Custom (Contact Sales) |
Dedicated Node Included | Growth Tier ($299/mo) | Business Plan Only |
Archive Data Access | All Paid Plans | All Plans |
Free Plan Available |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
QuickNode vs Alchemy: Subscription Tiers
A data-driven breakdown of core strengths and trade-offs between the two leading RPC providers, focusing on their tiered offerings.
01
QuickNode Pro: Superior Chain Coverage
Specific advantage: Supports 30+ chains natively, including Solana, Cosmos, and Aptos, with dedicated endpoints. This matters for multi-chain protocols like cross-chain bridges (e.g., Axelar) or indexers needing diverse data sources.
02
QuickNode Pro: Granular, Usage-Based Plans
Specific advantage: Transparent, request-based pricing (e.g., Growth tier: 25M requests/mo for $299). This matters for startups with variable traffic who want to avoid overpaying for unused capacity, unlike flat-rate enterprise plans.
03
QuickNode Con: Higher Cost for High Volume
Specific trade-off: At scale, request-based pricing can exceed Alchemy's unlimited models. This matters for high-TPS dApps like NFT marketplaces (e.g., Magic Eden) or DeFi aggregators where millions of daily calls are standard.
04
QuickNode Con: Less Mature Core APIs
Specific trade-off: While robust, its NFT and Token APIs are less feature-rich than Alchemy's. This matters for NFT-focused projects relying on advanced filters, metadata normalization, or webhook systems for real-time events.
05
Alchemy Pro: Unlimited Requests on Core Tiers
Specific advantage: Growth and Scale plans offer unlimited compute units. This matters for high-throughput applications like wallet providers (e.g., MetaMask) or block explorers that require consistent, uncapped RPC access.
06
Alchemy Pro: Deep Ethereum Tooling Suite
Specific advantage: Industry-standard APIs (e.g., alchemy_getAssetTransfers, Enhanced APIs) and SDKs. This matters for Ethereum-native DeFi (e.g., Aave, Uniswap) requiring complex event tracing and smart contract debugging.
07
Alchemy Con: Premium Pricing for Multi-Chain
Specific trade-off: Full multi-chain support (beyond Ethereum L2s) is gated behind Enterprise plans. This matters for budget-conscious teams building on Solana, Polygon, or other L1s who need cost-effective, unified access.
08
Alchemy Con: Less Transparent Scaling Costs
Specific trade-off: Enterprise pricing is custom-quoted, making it harder to forecast. This matters for CTOs with fixed budgets ($500K+) who require predictable OpEx scaling as user bases grow exponentially.
pros-cons-b
QuickNode vs Alchemy: Subscription Tiers
Alchemy: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs evaluating core infrastructure.
01
Alchemy's Strength: Developer Velocity
Superior SDK & tooling: Alchemy's enhanced APIs (e.g., alchemy_getAssetTransfers) and comprehensive dashboard reduce integration time by ~40% for complex queries. This matters for teams building data-intensive dApps like NFT marketplaces or on-chain analytics platforms.
02
Alchemy's Strength: Enterprise Reliability
Proven at scale: Processes over $500B in on-chain transactions annually with 99.9%+ uptime SLA. Supports protocols like OpenSea and 0x. This matters for applications where downtime directly translates to lost revenue or user trust.
03
Alchemy's Trade-off: Cost Structure
Higher entry price for premium features: Core features like the Notify webhook suite and Archive data require the Growth tier ($349/month). This matters for bootstrapped projects or those with predictable, low-volume needs where QuickNode's pay-as-you-go model is more economical.
04
Alchemy's Trade-off: Chain Flexibility
Ethereum/EVM-first focus: While expanding, its deepest tooling and optimizations are for Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Polygon. This matters for teams prioritizing Solana, Bitcoin, or other non-EVM chains where QuickNode offers more mature, native support.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: Which Model Fits Your Project?
QuickNode for Scale & Speed
Verdict: The performance-focused choice for high-throughput applications. Strengths: Superior global node distribution (30+ networks, 30+ chains) with dedicated bare metal infrastructure. Offers the highest request limits in its tier (e.g., 50M compute units on Growth vs. Alchemy's 300M on Scale). Real-time metrics and dedicated RPC endpoints minimize latency for trading bots, high-frequency data indexing, and real-time dashboards. Trade-off: Higher cost per compute unit at entry tiers. Complex pricing requires careful monitoring of compute unit consumption.
Alchemy for Scale & Speed
Verdict: Excellent for predictable, API-driven workloads with superior developer tooling. Strengths: Industry-leading Alchemy Supernode provides enhanced reliability and speed for core JSON-RPC calls. The Notify suite (Webhooks, Mempool, Alchemy SDK) automates real-time data pipelines. The Scale tier's 300M compute units offer a high ceiling for predictable monthly growth. Trade-off: Less geographic node distribution than QuickNode, which can affect latency in some regions. Bursty, unpredictable traffic can hit tier limits faster.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
Choosing between QuickNode and Alchemy's subscription tiers is a strategic decision based on deployment control versus developer velocity.
QuickNode excels at providing granular control and global infrastructure diversity. Its tiered plans allow for precise scaling of request limits, dedicated endpoints, and access to over 30 blockchains. For example, its Enterprise tier offers customizable RPC methods and dedicated node clusters, which is critical for high-frequency trading protocols like dYdX or Perpetual Protocol that require ultra-low latency and predictable performance across specific regions.
Alchemy takes a different approach by bundling unlimited compute units and prioritizing developer tooling within its core Growth and Scale tiers. This results in a trade-off: less granular control over request types, but superior out-of-the-box support for enhanced APIs (like alchemy_getAssetTransfers), WebSocket connections, and its proprietary NFT API. This bundle is optimized for teams building complex dApps like OpenSea or 0x that rely heavily on these advanced data layers for user experience.
The key trade-off: If your priority is infrastructure control, multi-chain deployment, and predictable scaling with clear usage caps, choose QuickNode. If you prioritize maximizing developer velocity, accessing enriched blockchain data, and leveraging a robust ecosystem of tools with a simplified usage model, choose Alchemy. For most new Web3 startups focused on rapid iteration, Alchemy's bundled approach provides more immediate value, while established protocols with specific performance SLAs may find QuickNode's configurability indispensable.
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