The Graph excels at providing high-performance, application-specific data indexing through its decentralized subgraph ecosystem. Its core strength is enabling developers to define custom data schemas and transformation logic for their dApps, resulting in low-latency queries. For example, major DeFi protocols like Uniswap and Aave rely on The Graph's subgraphs to power their frontends, querying millions of transactions daily with sub-second response times. This model prioritizes flexibility and performance for complex, on-chain logic.
LABS
Comparisons
The Graph vs Covalent: Blockchain Indexing & Querying
A technical comparison of The Graph and Covalent, two leading decentralized protocols for indexing and querying blockchain data. This analysis covers architecture, cost, developer experience, and security to help CTOs and protocol architects make an informed decision.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for Decentralized Data
A head-to-head comparison of The Graph and Covalent, the leading protocols for indexing and querying blockchain data.
Covalent takes a different approach by offering a unified API that provides a single point of access to normalized, historical data across over 200+ supported blockchains. This strategy abstracts away chain-specific complexities, delivering a consistent data model for wallet balances, transaction histories, and NFT metadata. The trade-off is less granular control over data transformation compared to writing a subgraph, but it dramatically reduces development time and infrastructure overhead for multi-chain applications.
The key trade-off: If your priority is custom, high-performance indexing for a specific protocol or use case on a few chains, choose The Graph. Its subgraph model is ideal for DeFi, NFTs, and DAOs needing tailored data. If you prioritize rapid development, multi-chain support, and access to rich historical data without managing infrastructure, choose Covalent. Its Unified API is better for wallets, explorers, and analytics platforms spanning many ecosystems.
tldr-summary
The Graph vs Covalent
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs for blockchain data indexing and querying.
01
The Graph: Decentralized & Customizable
Decentralized Network: Indexers, Curators, and Delegators secure the protocol. This matters for dApps requiring censorship resistance and long-term data availability guarantees. Supports GraphQL for flexible, client-defined queries.
Subgraph Flexibility: Developers define custom data schemas and indexing logic for specific smart contracts (e.g., Uniswap pools, NFT collections). This is ideal for protocols with unique, complex event data.
1,000+
Live Subgraphs
40+
Supported Chains
02
The Graph: Cost & Performance Trade-off
Variable Query Cost: Pricing is set by Indexers in GRT, leading to potential cost volatility. This matters for applications with unpredictable query volumes.
Indexing Latency: Subgraphs must sync historical data, causing delays for new or updated deployments. Not ideal for rapid prototyping or querying brand-new contracts immediately.
03
Covalent: Unified API & Historical Data
Single Unified API: One RESTful endpoint (/v1/{chain_id}/...) provides consistent access across all supported blockchains. This matters for multi-chain applications and teams wanting to avoid managing multiple RPC endpoints.
Rich Historical Data: Provides full historical state (wallet balances, NFT metadata, decoded logs) without needing to define schemas. Best for analytics dashboards, portfolio trackers, and compliance tools that need comprehensive, out-of-the-box data.
200+
Supported Blockchains
100B+
Daily Decoded Logs
04
Covalent: Centralization & Query Limits
Managed Service: A centralized API with premium tiers. This matters for projects sensitive to single points of failure or requiring full decentralization.
Pricing Tiers & Limits: Free tier has strict rate limits; enterprise plans required for high volume. Complex queries (e.g., multi-chain joins) can be challenging versus GraphQL. Less suitable for highly specific, real-time event filtering defined by the developer.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
The Graph vs Covalent: Blockchain Indexing & Querying
Direct comparison of key technical metrics and architectural features for blockchain data indexing solutions.
| Metric / Feature | The Graph | Covalent |
|---|---|---|
Primary Data Model | Subgraph-defined schemas | Unified API across 200+ chains |
Supported Blockchains | 40+ (EVM, Cosmos, NEAR) | 200+ (EVM, Cosmos, Algorand, etc.) |
Query Language | GraphQL | REST API (with GraphQL beta) |
Pricing Model | GRT query fees / decentralized | Usage-based subscription (CQT) |
Historical Data Depth | From subgraph deployment | Full chain history (no genesis block) |
Decentralized Network | ||
Real-time Data Updates |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
The Graph vs Covalent: Blockchain Indexing & Querying
Key strengths and trade-offs for two leading data indexing solutions. Choose based on your protocol's data complexity, team size, and cost structure.
01
The Graph: Decentralized Network
Decentralized Indexer Network: Data is served by a permissionless network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators, aligning with Web3 ethos. This matters for protocols requiring censorship-resistant data and those building on the subgraph standard (40,000+ deployed).
40K+
Subgraphs
200+
Indexers
03
The Graph: Cost & Complexity Trade-off
Operational Overhead: Running a production subgraph requires managing GRT token economics for query fees and indexing rewards. This matters for startups where developer bandwidth is limited or projects with unpredictable query volumes that need fixed costs.
04
Covalent: Unified API
Single API for 200+ Chains: Covalent provides a consistent REST API across 200+ supported blockchains, including Ethereum, Polygon, and Cosmos. This matters for multi-chain applications (wallets, dashboards) that need uniform data access without managing separate indexers.
200+
Chains
1
API
05
Covalent: Predictable Pricing
Simplified Cost Structure: Pay-as-you-go pricing with monthly credits, avoiding cryptocurrency volatility and staking management. This matters for enterprise teams with fixed budgets or projects requiring clear, upfront operational costs.
06
Covalent: Schema Flexibility Trade-off
Pre-Defined Data Models: While fast to start, you query from Covalent's standardized schema, not a custom one. This matters for protocols with highly specialized data relationships (e.g., complex DeFi yield strategies) that may not map perfectly to their generic models.
pros-cons-b
THE GRAPH VS COVALENT
Covalent: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for blockchain indexing and querying at a glance.
01
The Graph: Decentralized & Open
Decentralized Network: Subgraphs are open-source and run by a permissionless network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators. This matters for protocols like Uniswap or Aave that require censorship-resistant, verifiable data for their dApps.
02
The Graph: Real-Time & Granular
Event-Driven Indexing: Subgraphs index specific smart contract events, enabling real-time, highly granular queries (e.g., "all Uniswap V3 swaps for a specific pool"). This is critical for building live dashboards, analytics, and complex DeFi logic.
03
Covalent: Unified & Historical
Single API for 200+ Chains: Provides a unified API across 200+ supported blockchains, including Ethereum, Polygon, and Avalanche. This matters for multi-chain applications like Rainbow Wallet or CoinGecko that need consistent data access without managing multiple indexers.
04
Covalent: Rich & Enriched Data
Enriched Data Models: Returns rich, decoded data (e.g., NFT metadata, token prices, wallet balances) without requiring complex subgraph development. This is ideal for building portfolio trackers, tax tools, or marketplaces that need off-chain data merged with on-chain activity.
05
The Graph: Developer Friction
Subgraph Development Overhead: Requires writing and deploying a custom subgraph (GraphQL schema + mapping scripts) for each new smart contract or data need. This adds complexity for simple queries or rapid prototyping on new chains.
06
Covalent: Cost & Centralization
Commercial API Model: Operates as a centralized commercial API with usage-based pricing (despite decentralized data sourcing). This can lead to unpredictable costs at scale and presents a single point of failure, which may not suit fully decentralized protocol stacks.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose: Decision by Use Case
The Graph for DeFi
Verdict: The standard for composable, on-chain data. Strengths: Unmatched for real-time, subgraph-powered queries of custom smart contract events (e.g., Uniswap pools, Aave positions). Its decentralized network ensures data integrity for high-value applications. Native GraphQL API is developer-friendly for building complex dashboards and analytics. Trade-off: Requires subgraph development and deployment, adding initial overhead.
Covalent for DeFi
Verdict: Superior for aggregated, cross-chain portfolio and historical analysis. Strengths: Provides a unified API to fetch wallet balances, transaction history, and token holdings across 200+ chains without writing a single line of indexing logic. Ideal for building portfolio trackers, tax reporting tools, or dashboards that need a holistic, historical view (e.g., tracking a wallet's yield farming history across Ethereum, Polygon, and Arbitrum). Trade-off: Less real-time for niche, custom contract events compared to a dedicated subgraph.
BLOCKCHAIN INDEXING COMPARISON
Technical Deep Dive: Architecture and Security
A technical analysis of The Graph and Covalent's underlying architectures, security models, and performance characteristics for CTOs and protocol architects making critical infrastructure decisions.
Yes, The Graph has a more decentralized network architecture. It relies on a permissionless network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators secured by its native GRT token. Covalent utilizes a more centralized, managed service model with a single API endpoint, though it aggregates data from many decentralized sources. The Graph's model prioritizes censorship resistance, while Covalent's focuses on developer convenience and reliability.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
A data-driven breakdown to guide your infrastructure choice between two leading indexing protocols.
The Graph excels at providing high-performance, decentralized indexing for real-time, application-specific data. Its subgraph architecture allows developers to define custom data schemas and transformation logic, making it ideal for complex DeFi and NFT analytics. For example, major protocols like Uniswap and Aave rely on The Graph's subgraphs to power their frontends, querying millions of transactions with sub-second latency. Its decentralized network of Indexers, secured by the GRT token, prioritizes censorship resistance and data verifiability.
Covalent takes a different approach by offering a unified API that provides normalized, historical data across 200+ supported blockchains. This strategy results in a trade-off: less customization for immediate, out-of-the-box access to a vast multi-chain dataset. Covalent's strength is its breadth, enabling use cases like wallet portfolio tracking and cross-chain analytics without building custom indexers. Its business model, based on API credits, offers predictable pricing but centralizes infrastructure control compared to The Graph's permissionless network.
The key trade-off is between customization & decentralization versus breadth & time-to-market. If your priority is building a highly optimized, decentralized dApp on Ethereum, Arbitrum, or other EVM chains with real-time queries, choose The Graph. If you prioritize rapid prototyping, need historical data across a wide array of chains (including non-EVM like Solana or Algorand), and want to avoid infrastructure management, choose Covalent.
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