The Graph excels at providing highly customized, real-time data for specific smart contracts because its decentralized network of Indexers processes and serves subgraphs defined by developers. For example, protocols like Uniswap and Aave rely on subgraphs to power their frontends and analytics, querying data with millisecond latency using GraphQL. This model offers unparalleled flexibility for novel data structures but requires initial subgraph development and management.
LABS
Comparisons
The Graph vs Covalent: DeFi Data Indexing & APIs
A technical analysis for CTOs and protocol architects comparing The Graph's subgraph model with Covalent's unified API. We evaluate query flexibility, multi-chain support, data freshness, and cost structures to inform infrastructure decisions.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for On-Chain Data Access
A data-driven comparison of The Graph and Covalent for CTOs building the next generation of DeFi applications.
Covalent takes a different approach by providing a unified, historical API that indexes the entire blockchain ledger. This results in a trade-off: you gain instant access to a massive, standardized dataset across 200+ supported chains—including full transaction histories and wallet balances—without writing any indexing logic, but with less granular control over data transformation for niche use cases compared to a custom subgraph.
The key trade-off: If your priority is custom, low-latency queries for a specific protocol's events and you have the engineering resources to build/maintain a subgraph, choose The Graph. If you prioritize rapid prototyping, multi-chain compatibility, and rich historical data without infrastructure overhead, choose Covalent.
tldr-summary
PROS & CONS
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance.
01
The Graph: Decentralized Query Engine
Decentralized Network: Subgraphs are hosted by a network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators. This matters for protocols requiring censorship resistance and data provenance.
- Best for: Building dApps that are part of the decentralized web stack (e.g., Uniswap, Aave).
- Trade-off: Requires GRT tokens for queries and curation, adding protocol-level complexity.
02
The Graph: Custom Data Schemas
Flexible Subgraph Definition: Developers define their own schema and mapping logic in GraphQL. This matters for complex, application-specific queries that aggregate events across contracts.
- Example: Tracking a user's entire liquidity position history across multiple Uniswap v3 pools.
- Trade-off: Requires upfront development work to build and maintain each subgraph.
03
Covalent: Unified API for 200+ Chains
Multi-Chain Coverage: Single, consistent API across 200+ supported blockchains, including Ethereum, Polygon, Avalanche, and Cosmos. This matters for portfolio apps, multi-chain explorers, and enterprises needing a unified view.
- Key Metric: One API call can fetch a wallet's entire cross-chain transaction history.
- Trade-off: Less granular control over the exact logic indexing specific protocol events.
04
Covalent: Rich, Pre-Built Data
Zero-Configuration Data: Provides rich, normalized data classes (e.g., token balances, NFT metadata, decoded log events) without needing to write indexing code. This matters for rapid prototyping and analytics dashboards.
- Example: Get ERC-20 balances with spot prices and logo URLs in a single endpoint.
- Trade-off: Less ability to create highly specialized, non-standard data aggregations.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
The Graph vs Covalent: DeFi Data Indexing & APIs
Direct comparison of key architectural and operational metrics for blockchain data indexing.
| Metric | The Graph | Covalent |
|---|---|---|
Data Model | Subgraph-defined schema | Unified API across 200+ chains |
Supported Chains | 40+ (EVM & non-EVM) | 200+ (EVM, Cosmos, UTXO, etc.) |
Query Language | GraphQL | REST API & SQL |
Pricing Model | GRT query fees (pay-per-query) | Usage-based subscription (CQT) |
Data Freshness | ~1 block (near real-time) | ~15 min (batch updates) |
Historical Data Depth | From subgraph deployment | Full chain history (genesis) |
Decentralized Network | ||
Native Multi-Chain Aggregation |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
The Graph vs Covalent: DeFi Data Indexing & APIs
A data-driven comparison of two leading blockchain data infrastructure providers. Use this to evaluate which solution aligns with your protocol's specific data needs and engineering constraints.
01
The Graph: Decentralized & Customizable
Decentralized Network: Indexes data via a permissionless network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators, aligning with Web3 ethos. This matters for protocols requiring censorship-resistant data access.
Subgraph Flexibility: Developers define custom data schemas and indexing logic via GraphQL subgraphs. This is critical for complex, application-specific queries (e.g., Uniswap's trading volume per pool).
Ecosystem Integration: Native support for 40+ chains including Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Polygon, with deep integration into dApp tooling like Hardhat.
02
The Graph: Potential Drawbacks
Operational Overhead: Requires managing GRT token economics for query fees and subgraph curation. This adds complexity versus a simple API key.
Indexing Latency: Subgraphs must be synced, which can cause delays for new contracts or events. Not ideal for real-time dashboards needing instant data.
Cost Uncertainty: Query costs fluctuate based on GRT price and network demand, making budgeting less predictable than fixed-price plans.
03
Covalent: Unified & Enterprise-Ready
Unified API: Provides a single, consistent REST API across 200+ supported blockchains. This drastically reduces integration time for multi-chain applications.
Rich Historical Data: Offers extensive historical data (full transaction histories, NFT metadata) out-of-the-box without custom indexing. Essential for analytics platforms like DeFi Llama.
Predictable Pricing: Clear, usage-based pricing tiers (including a free tier) with no token management, simplifying financial planning for startups and enterprises.
04
Covalent: Potential Drawbacks
Less Customization: Data models are standardized. While flexible, you cannot define custom on-chain logic for indexing like with subgraphs.
Centralized Gateway: The API is provided by a centralized service (though with decentralized data sourcing). This may not satisfy protocols with strict decentralization requirements.
Data Granularity: For highly niche, real-time data needs (e.g., a specific event emitted once per day), a custom subgraph may offer more precision.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
The Graph vs Covalent: Key Differentiators
A data-driven comparison of two leading blockchain data indexing solutions, highlighting their core architectural strengths and ideal use cases.
01
The Graph: Decentralized Query Engine
Core Advantage: A decentralized network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators. This matters for protocols requiring censorship resistance and verifiable data provenance, as queries are served by a permissionless marketplace. Supports GraphQL, enabling complex, nested queries in a single request. Ideal for building dApps where data integrity is non-negotiable, like on-chain governance dashboards or decentralized analytics platforms.
40+
Supported Networks
Subgraph-based
Data Model
02
The Graph: Developer Flexibility
Core Advantage: Custom subgraphs allow developers to define exactly which smart contract events and calls to index. This matters for niche protocols or novel use cases where pre-built schemas are insufficient (e.g., indexing a custom AMM's liquidity events). However, it requires significant developer overhead to write, deploy, and maintain these subgraphs.
High
Customization
Moderate-High
Dev Overhead
03
Covalent: Unified API Simplicity
Core Advantage: A single, unified API serving normalized data across 200+ blockchains. This matters for enterprise teams and product managers who need to launch multi-chain features quickly without managing separate indexers. Provides rich, wallet-level data (balances, transactions, NFT holdings) out-of-the-box via endpoints like /v1/{chain_id}/address/{address}/balances_v2/. Dramatically reduces time-to-market.
200+
Supported Chains
Unified API
Architecture
04
Covalent: Historical Data & Reliability
Core Advantage: No missed data guarantee via a full-node infrastructure that re-org corrects and backfills historical data. This matters for financial reporting, compliance, and treasury management where data completeness is critical. Offers Class A (real-time) and Class B (historical) datasets. Trade-off: Less granular query flexibility compared to GraphQL, relying on parameterized REST endpoints.
No Missed Data
Guarantee
REST Endpoints
Interface
05
Choose The Graph If...
You are building a decentralized application where the data layer must also be decentralized. Your team has GraphQL expertise and the resources to develop and maintain custom subgraphs. Your primary use case involves complex, relational queries (e.g., "get all liquidity events for this pool, joined with user stakes").
06
Choose Covalent If...
You need to integrate data from dozens of chains quickly with a single API key. Your priority is speed of development and operational reliability over deep customization. Your use case centers on wallet/portfolio data, transaction history, or NFT indexing without building an indexer from scratch. Your budget supports a premium, managed service for critical data pipelines.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which
The Graph for DeFi & Analytics
Verdict: The superior choice for complex, custom on-chain analytics and protocol-specific dashboards. Strengths: Unmatched for building subgraphs that track specific smart contract events (e.g., Uniswap V3 LP positions, Aave loan health). Its decentralized network ensures data integrity and censorship resistance for critical financial data. The GraphQL API provides precise, flexible queries. Trade-offs: Requires developer effort to create/maintain subgraphs. Query costs (GRT) apply. Best For: Protocols like Uniswap, Compound, or Lido needing deep, real-time analytics on their own contracts.
Covalent for DeFi & Analytics
Verdict: The better choice for broad, multi-chain portfolio tracking and aggregated market data. Strengths: Provides a unified API across 200+ blockchains. No need to build custom indexers; get wallet balances, token holdings, and historical transactions instantly. The Covalent Unified API normalizes data across chains (Ethereum, Polygon, Arbitrum). Trade-offs: Less granular control over data transformation logic compared to a custom subgraph. Best For: Portfolio trackers (e.g., Zapper, Debank), tax platforms, and dashboards needing a holistic, multi-chain view.
THE GRAPH VS COVALENT
Technical Deep Dive: Query Models and Data Freshness
Choosing a data indexing layer is a foundational decision for any Web3 application. This comparison breaks down the core architectural and performance differences between The Graph and Covalent to help you select the right tool for your DeFi, NFT, or analytics project.
The core difference is in their data query models: The Graph uses a decentralized, subgraph-specific indexing model, while Covalent provides a unified, multi-chain API. The Graph requires developers to define custom subgraphs (GraphQL schemas) to index specific smart contract events, offering high customization. Covalent ingests and normalizes all on-chain data into a single, unified data model accessible via REST APIs, prioritizing ease of use and broad coverage over granular customization for a single protocol.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A data-driven breakdown to guide your infrastructure choice between The Graph and Covalent.
The Graph excels at providing high-performance, real-time data for specific on-chain events due to its decentralized network of Indexers serving subgraphs. For example, leading DeFi protocols like Uniswap and Aave rely on its subgraphs for querying precise liquidity pool metrics and user positions with sub-second latency. Its strength lies in customizability for complex, application-specific logic, making it the go-to for protocols that need to index niche smart contract data not available elsewhere.
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: while queries may not be as fine-tuned for a single protocol's custom events, developers gain instant access to massive historical datasets—like full wallet transaction histories or token balances across chains—without building any indexing infrastructure. Its Class A Unified API delivers consistent schemas, simplifying multi-chain development.
The key trade-off: If your priority is custom, low-latency queries for a specific protocol or a handful of chains, choose The Graph. It is optimal for dApps like DeFi dashboards or NFT marketplaces that need to react instantly to on-chain state changes. If you prioritize broad, historical data coverage across many blockchains with minimal setup, choose Covalent. It is the superior choice for cross-chain explorers, portfolio trackers, or any application requiring rich, historical context without managing indexing pipelines.
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