The Graph excels at providing a decentralized, permissionless indexing standard with a massive, battle-tested ecosystem. Its subgraph protocol is the de facto standard for querying blockchain data, with over 3,000 subgraphs deployed and securing billions in TVL for protocols like Uniswap and Aave. Developers benefit from a robust hosted service for rapid prototyping and a decentralized network for production, though this can introduce complexity in managing subgraph versions and indexing rules.
LABS
Comparisons
The Graph vs Envio: Developer Experience & Performance
A technical comparison for engineering leaders evaluating The Graph's established subgraph ecosystem against Envio's newer, performance-focused indexing platform. We analyze sync speeds, developer workflow, cost structure, and architectural trade-offs.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Indexing Infrastructure Decision
Choosing between The Graph and Envio is a foundational decision that impacts developer velocity, query performance, and long-term scalability for your dApp.
Envio takes a different approach by offering a high-performance, developer-first indexing engine with a unified GraphQL endpoint across multiple chains. This results in a trade-off: you gain significant speed and flexibility—with sub-second indexing latency and support for complex event processing—but operate within a more centralized, managed service model. Its HyperSync technology enables rapid historical data ingestion, which is critical for analytics and complex DeFi applications.
The key trade-off: If your priority is decentralization, censorship resistance, and leveraging a vast existing data ecosystem, choose The Graph. If you prioritize developer ergonomics, multi-chain query performance, and the ability to index complex logic without managing node infrastructure, choose Envio.
tldr-summary
The Graph vs Envio
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs for developers choosing a blockchain indexing solution.
02
The Graph: Maturity & Ecosystem
Deep protocol integration: Supports 40+ chains and has a massive, established developer community. This matters for teams building multi-chain applications or those who need to leverage existing, battle-tested subgraphs for major DeFi and NFT protocols without building from scratch.
40+
Supported Chains
1,000+
Active Subgraphs
04
Envio: Developer Ergonomics
Unified, code-first experience: A single config file (envio.yaml) and TypeScript-based handler logic for any supported chain. This matters for full-stack engineering teams who want to avoid the complexity of managing subgraph manifests, assembly scripts, and separate deployments for each chain, reducing development time significantly.
1
Config File
TypeScript
Primary Language
05
The Graph: Cost & Complexity Trade-off
Potential for higher operational overhead: Managing GRT bonding, delegation, and query fees adds complexity. This can be a con for smaller teams or MVPs where developer velocity and predictable, simple costs are the top priority over full decentralization.
06
Envio: Centralization & Maturity Trade-off
Currently a managed service: While performant, Envio operates as a centralized service, introducing a trust assumption. This is a con for protocols with maximum security requirements or those whose roadmap depends on the long-term, verifiable guarantees of a decentralized data layer.
DEVELOPER EXPERIENCE & PERFORMANCE
Head-to-Head Feature Comparison: The Graph vs Envio
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for blockchain indexing solutions.
| Metric | The Graph | Envio |
|---|---|---|
Indexing Speed (Blocks/sec) | ~1-2 | ~100-200 |
Multi-chain Subgraph | ||
Avg. Indexing Latency | ~10-30 min | < 1 min |
Native Data Transformation | ||
Hosting Model | Decentralized Network | Self-hosted or Managed |
Supported Chains | 40+ | 20+ |
Developer Language | AssemblyScript/TypeScript | TypeScript/Rust |
THE GRAPH VS ENVIO
Performance Benchards: Sync Speed & Throughput
Direct comparison of indexing performance and developer experience metrics.
| Metric | The Graph | Envio |
|---|---|---|
Sync Speed (New Chain) | Hours to days | < 1 hour |
Peak Indexing Throughput | ~1,000 blocks/sec | ~10,000 blocks/sec |
Multi-Chain Query Latency | ~200-500ms | ~50-100ms |
Deterministic Indexing | ||
Native Historical Data | ||
Supported Chains | 40+ | 15+ |
Pricing Model | Query Fees (GRT) | Fixed Subscription |
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Which: Decision by Use Case
The Graph for DeFi
Verdict: The established standard for composable, multi-chain data. Strengths: Unmatched ecosystem integration with protocols like Uniswap, Aave, and Compound. Its decentralized network and GraphQL API provide a single, reliable source for historical and real-time data across Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Polygon. This is critical for dashboards, analytics, and applications that rely on proven, battle-tested data feeds. Considerations: Indexing speed is dependent on subgraph deployment and syncing, which can be slower for new or complex events. Query costs are paid in GRT.
Envio for DeFi
Verdict: Superior for high-frequency, custom data pipelines. Strengths: Hyper-sync technology enables indexing speeds up to 100x faster than traditional methods, crucial for real-time arbitrage bots or liquidation engines. Developers write event handlers in TypeScript/Rust with a familiar developer experience. Ideal for projects on high-throughput chains like Solana, Sui, or Aptos where low-latency data is a competitive edge. Considerations: A newer ecosystem with less pre-built schema integration for mainstream DeFi protocols compared to The Graph's subgraph marketplace.
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
The Graph vs Envio: Developer Experience & Performance
A data-driven comparison of indexing infrastructure for CTOs and architects. Evaluate trade-offs in speed, cost, and flexibility.
01
The Graph: Decentralized Network
Established ecosystem: 40,000+ subgraphs deployed and 1,000+ active indexers. This matters for protocols requiring censorship resistance and those building on the long-tail of EVM chains where The Graph has coverage.
- Proven Reliability: Handles billions of daily queries for protocols like Uniswap and Aave.
- Standardized Tooling: Mature GraphQL endpoint and hosted service for rapid prototyping.
40,000+
Subgraphs
30+
Supported Chains
02
The Graph: Query Cost & Complexity
Indirect cost model: Developers pay via GRT token for queries, with pricing abstracted by indexer curation. This matters for applications with unpredictable query volumes where budgeting can be challenging.
- Performance Variability: Query speed depends on the chosen indexer's infrastructure, leading to inconsistent latencies.
- Subgraph Syncing: Initial indexing of historical data can take hours, slowing development iteration.
03
Envio: Hyper-Sync Performance
Deterministic indexing speed: Uses a proprietary HyperSync to fetch blockchain data up to 50x faster than RPCs. This matters for high-frequency dApps and real-time analytics requiring sub-second latency.
- Predictable Pricing: Fixed monthly subscription model (e.g., $299/month for 50M monthly events) simplifies cost forecasting.
- Unified Indexing: Single codebase can index across EVM, Solana, and Starknet simultaneously.
< 1 sec
Sync Latency
50x
Faster Sync
04
Envio: Centralization & Maturity
Managed service dependency: Relies on Envio's centralized infrastructure. This matters for mission-critical DeFi protocols where a single point of failure is unacceptable.
- Ecosystem Size: Smaller developer community (~100+ projects) compared to The Graph's established network.
- Protocol Risk: As a newer platform (launched 2023), its long-term operational track record is still being established.
pros-cons-b
The Graph vs Envio: Developer Experience & Performance
Envio: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs and architects evaluating indexing infrastructure.
01
Envio: Developer Velocity
Unified, declarative config: Single hypergraph.yaml file defines the entire indexing pipeline (sources, handlers, sinks). This reduces boilerplate and accelerates iteration for teams building on multiple chains like Ethereum, Polygon, and Solana.
02
Envio: Performance & Cost
Optimized execution engine: Benchmarks show indexing speeds up to 10x faster than subgraphs for complex logic. Predictable pricing with a fixed monthly fee per indexer, avoiding The Graph's variable query fee model and GRT token economics.
03
The Graph: Decentralized Network
Battle-tested infrastructure: Over 1,000+ subgraphs in production, secured by a decentralized network of Indexers and Curators. This provides censorship resistance and data provenance critical for protocols like Uniswap and Aave.
04
The Graph: Ecosystem & Tooling
Mature developer suite: Extensive documentation, The Graph Studio GUI, and integration with popular frameworks like Hardhat and Foundry. Broad protocol support with a vast library of existing subgraphs for forking and reference.
05
Envio: Multi-Chain Complexity
Steeper learning curve: While powerful, managing a single config for disparate chains (EVM vs. Solana) requires deep understanding of each chain's data models. Less community support compared to The Graph's established forums.
06
The Graph: Query Performance & Cost
Potential latency spikes: Query performance depends on decentralized Indexer response times and network congestion. Unpredictable operational costs for high-throughput dApps due to the query fee market and GRT token volatility.
THE GRAPH VS ENVIO
Technical Deep Dive: Architecture & Data Flow
A side-by-side analysis of the developer experience and performance characteristics of two leading blockchain indexing solutions, focusing on architecture, data flow, and operational trade-offs.
Envio is generally faster for real-time data ingestion and querying. Its HyperSync technology streams finalized blocks directly, bypassing the RPC layer, which reduces latency. The Graph's Substreams offer high-speed streaming, but its hosted service can have multi-second indexing delays. For applications requiring sub-second updates (like high-frequency dashboards or real-time alerts), Envio's architecture provides a performance edge. However, The Graph's decentralized network offers stronger guarantees for historical data availability and censorship resistance.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
Choosing between The Graph and Envio hinges on your project's tolerance for decentralization versus its need for raw indexing speed and customizability.
The Graph excels at providing a decentralized, permissionless indexing protocol for public blockchain data. Its strength lies in its robust network of Indexers, Curators, and Delegators, secured by the GRT token, which ensures data integrity and censorship resistance. For example, major DeFi protocols like Uniswap and Aave rely on its subgraphs, which index billions of data points across Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Polygon, demonstrating proven reliability at scale.
Envio takes a different approach by offering a high-performance, developer-centric indexing engine designed for speed and flexibility. This results in a trade-off: it operates as a centralized service (or self-hosted solution) that sacrifices some decentralization for significantly faster sync times and the ability to write custom indexing logic in TypeScript. Developers can bypass The Graph's learning curve and achieve sub-second latency for complex queries on chains like Solana, EVM L2s, and Fuel.
The key trade-off: If your priority is decentralized infrastructure, long-term protocol resilience, and leveraging a battle-tested ecosystem, choose The Graph. If you prioritize developer velocity, sub-second performance for real-time dApps, and need to index non-EVM chains or complex event logic, choose Envio. For CTOs, the decision maps to a classic build-vs-buy dilemma: Envio for rapid, controlled deployment; The Graph for inheriting a decentralized data layer.
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