Kiln excels at providing a unified, self-custodial dashboard for managing multi-chain staking because of its deep integration with institutional custody solutions like Fireblocks and Copper. For example, their platform supports over 40+ proof-of-stake networks, allowing a single team to manage a diverse portfolio from one interface while maintaining direct control of validator keys.
LABS
Comparisons
Kiln vs Blockdaemon: Enterprise Staking Infrastructure
A technical comparison for CTOs and protocol architects evaluating Kiln's white-label liquid staking solutions against Blockdaemon's comprehensive institutional node management suite.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Enterprise Staking Infrastructure Divide
Choosing between Kiln and Blockdaemon is a foundational decision that defines your staking operation's security, cost, and flexibility.
Blockdaemon takes a different approach by offering a fully managed, white-glove service with a focus on high-touch support and enterprise-grade SLAs. This results in a trade-off: you gain operational peace of mind and dedicated infrastructure, but with less direct, hands-on control over the validator environment compared to a self-serve platform.
The key trade-off: If your priority is granular control, self-custody, and managing a multi-chain portfolio from a single pane of glass, choose Kiln. If you prioritize a fully outsourced, high-SLA operation with dedicated support and infrastructure management, choose Blockdaemon.
tldr-summary
Kiln vs Blockdaemon
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs for enterprise-grade staking infrastructure.
01
Kiln: Superior Multi-Chain Integration
Native multi-chain support: Built for Ethereum, Solana, and Cosmos ecosystems from the ground up. This matters for protocols like Lido, Aave, and Uniswap DAOs that need unified staking operations across multiple networks.
02
Kiln: Developer-First Tooling
Comprehensive API & SDKs: Offers a full-featured REST API and client libraries for programmatic validator management. This matters for engineering teams building automated treasury management or custom dashboards.
03
Blockdaemon: Institutional-Grade Security
SLA-backed uptime & insurance: Provides 99.9%+ SLA with dedicated insurance pools. This matters for regulated entities like banks (e.g., Standard Chartered's Zodia Custody) and public companies requiring auditable, compliant infrastructure.
04
Blockdaemon: Global Physical Infrastructure
Owned data center footprint: Operates proprietary nodes across 40+ cloud regions and on-premise locations. This matters for enterprises with strict data sovereignty requirements or those mitigating cloud provider concentration risk.
05
Choose Kiln for...
Web3-native projects and DAOs needing deep multi-chain integration and programmable control. Ideal for:
- Protocol Treasuries (e.g., managing staked ETH from treasury)
- Staking-as-a-Service Platforms building atop their API
- Teams prioritizing developer experience and automation.
06
Choose Blockdaemon for...
Traditional finance and large institutions requiring maximum security, compliance, and hands-off node operations. Ideal for:
- Custodians & Banks (e.g., Anchorage, Gemini)
- Public Companies with strict audit trails
- Enterprises where risk mitigation outweighs cost optimization.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Kiln vs Blockdaemon: Enterprise Staking Infrastructure
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for institutional-grade staking.
| Metric / Feature | Kiln | Blockdaemon |
|---|---|---|
Supported Networks | Ethereum, Solana, Polygon, Cosmos, 30+ | Ethereum, Solana, Cardano, Polkadot, 70+ |
Slashing Insurance | ||
Non-Custodial Key Management | ||
Self-Serve Dashboard | ||
Dedicated Node Operations | ||
MEV-Boost Integration | ||
API-First Architecture | ||
Institutional Clients | Ledger, Nexo, Figment | Coinbase, Kraken, Gemini |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Kiln vs Blockdaemon: Enterprise Staking Infrastructure
A data-driven comparison of the two leading enterprise-grade staking infrastructure providers. Evaluate key differentiators for institutional validators and protocol teams.
01
Kiln's Strength: Multi-Chain Integration & MEV
Deep protocol integration: Native support for EigenLayer, Lido, and direct staking on Ethereum, Solana, and Cosmos. Offers MEV-boost relays and block building services to maximize validator rewards. This matters for protocols seeking to diversify revenue streams and institutions wanting to capture MEV.
10+
Supported Networks
02
Kiln's Weakness: Enterprise-First Complexity
Steep learning curve: Platform and APIs are built for sophisticated users with dedicated DevOps teams. Less turnkey than competitors for smaller operations. This matters for organizations without deep in-house blockchain engineering resources who need a managed service experience.
03
Blockdaemon's Strength: Institutional Scale & Compliance
Regulatory-first posture: SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 certified, with dedicated compliance tools for proof-of-stake. Global node footprint across 100+ cloud regions for geo-redundancy. This matters for publicly traded companies, banks, and custodians (e.g., BitGo, Gemini) with strict audit and governance requirements.
99.9%
Uptime SLA
04
Blockdaemon's Weakness: Higher Cost Structure
Premium pricing model: Enterprise plans are typically more expensive, with costs tied to managed service levels and compliance overhead. Less favorable for bootstrapped protocols or validators focused purely on maximizing yield over institutional features. This matters for cost-sensitive operations where infrastructure spend directly impacts net staking APR.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS ANALYSIS
Kiln vs Blockdaemon: Enterprise Staking Infrastructure
A data-driven comparison of the two leading institutional-grade staking platforms. Use this matrix to evaluate which provider aligns with your protocol's security, compliance, and operational requirements.
01
Kiln's Core Strength: Protocol Specialization
Deep multi-chain integration: Offers native staking for 30+ networks including Ethereum, Solana, and Cosmos, with direct support for complex operations like EigenLayer AVS and Polygon zkEVM. This matters for protocols building cross-chain applications or requiring advanced restaking strategies.
30+
Networks
$5B+
Staked Assets
03
Blockdaemon's Core Strength: Institutional Compliance
Enterprise-grade security & audit trail: Features SOC 2 Type II certification, dedicated HSM clusters, and detailed compliance reporting for FINRA and SEC guidelines. This matters for TradFi institutions, publicly traded companies, or any entity with stringent regulatory oversight requirements.
SOC 2 Type II
Certification
04
Blockdaemon's Core Strength: Global Infrastructure Scale
Massive, decentralized node footprint: Operates tens of thousands of nodes across 80+ cloud regions and bare-metal data centers, ensuring ultra-high redundancy and low-latency performance. This matters for applications where maximum uptime and geographic distribution are non-negotiable.
80+
Cloud Regions
05
Kiln's Trade-off: Focus Over Breadth
Primarily staking-centric: While excellent for staking/restaking, it does not offer the broader blockchain node infrastructure (e.g., Arbitrum, Base RPC nodes) that full-service providers do. This may necessitate a multi-vendor strategy for teams needing comprehensive node services beyond staking.
06
Blockdaemon's Trade-off: Complexity & Cost
Enterprise pricing and integration overhead: Premium security and global footprint come with higher costs and potentially longer sales cycles. The extensive feature set can be overkill for agile Web3-native startups focused solely on optimizing staking yield and time-to-market.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Platform
Kiln for Security & Compliance
Verdict: The definitive choice for regulated entities and institutions with zero-trust requirements. Strengths: Kiln is SOC 2 Type II and ISO 27001 certified, offering a fully non-custodial architecture where the client retains sole control of validator keys. Its Enterprise Dashboard provides granular audit trails, role-based access control (RBAC), and real-time compliance reporting. Integration with hardware security modules (HSMs) like Fireblocks and Ledger Enterprise is native. For protocols like Lido or Rocket Pool that require institutional-grade node operators, Kiln's attestations are a critical dependency.
Blockdaemon for Security & Compliance
Strengths: Also highly compliant with SOC 2 and strong institutional backing. Its Ubiquity platform offers a unified view across 70+ networks. However, its hybrid model (offering both non-custodial and custodial key management) introduces a decision point. Its security is proven at scale, managing over $10B in assets, but for entities where the perception of absolute self-custody is paramount, Kiln's pure non-custodial stance is stronger.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A data-driven breakdown to guide enterprise infrastructure decisions between two leading staking providers.
Kiln excels at providing a deeply integrated, self-custodial staking experience for protocols and sophisticated institutions. Its core strength is a unified API and dashboard that aggregates staking across 40+ networks (Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos) while allowing clients to retain control of their validator keys. This approach minimizes counterparty risk and is ideal for entities like Lido, Coinbase Cloud, and Figment who build on its white-label solutions. Kiln's infrastructure supports over $4.5B in staked assets, demonstrating its scalability for large-scale operations.
Blockdaemon takes a different approach by offering a broader, enterprise-grade managed service layer with a focus on institutional security and compliance. Its strategy involves providing a full-stack node management platform, from dedicated nodes and MPC wallets to institutional-grade SLAs with 99.9%+ uptime guarantees. This results in a trade-off: less direct key control for the client in exchange for a fully outsourced, operationally heavy-duty solution. Blockdaemon's clientele, including JPMorgan, Kraken, and Celsius, often prioritize this hands-off, compliant infrastructure.
The key trade-off is control versus convenience. Choose Kiln if your priority is self-custody, deep protocol integration, and building a branded staking product atop a robust API. Its model is optimal for crypto-native teams managing large, multi-chain treasuries. Choose Blockdaemon when your priority is outsourcing all node operations to a compliant, audited vendor with ironclad SLAs, making it a safer first step for TradFi institutions or teams with limited DevOps resources.
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