The Graph vs SubQuery: Protocol Selection

Decentralized Production Network: Indexers stake GRT to serve queries, with a proven track record of 99.9%+ uptime. This matters for mission-critical dApps like Uniswap or Aave that require robust, censorship-resistant data.

Dominant Market Share: Over 40,000+ active subgraphs powering major DeFi and NFT protocols. This creates a powerful network effect where developers can fork and build upon existing subgraphs (e.g., for ERC-20 tokens) rather than starting from scratch.

Flexible Self-Hosting: Run your indexer anywhere (your own infra, SubQuery's Managed Service, or a future decentralized network). This matters for rapid prototyping and migration where you need full control over performance and cost without immediate decentralization overhead.

Native Multi-Chain Support: A single project can index data from over 100+ supported networks (Cosmos, Polkadot, Ethereum, etc.). Custom Processors allow you to output data directly to your own database (PostgreSQL) or application, bypassing the GraphQL layer entirely for complex analytics.

Cons: The decentralized network introduces query pricing complexity (GRT payments, curation) and can have higher latency (~200-500ms) vs. a centralized endpoint. Not ideal for simple internal dashboards or applications where decentralization isn't a core requirement.

Cons: The decentralized SQT network is still in development, meaning the managed service is the primary production option today. This carries centralization risk for long-term projects. The ecosystem of shared datasets is also smaller than The Graph's.

Established Decentralized Network: Operates a permissionless mainnet with 200+ Indexers and 4,000+ Curators. This matters for production dApps requiring censorship resistance and data integrity guarantees, as seen with Uniswap and Aave.

Higher Operational Overhead: Requires managing GRT for query fees and understanding delegation/curation economics. This matters for teams with limited crypto-native ops who prefer predictable, simple billing over interacting with a token economy.

Superior DX & Multi-Chain Management: Offers a managed service, intuitive SDK, and a single interface for 30+ chains. This matters for rapid prototyping and teams building cross-chain applications who want to avoid infrastructure complexity, as utilized by Astar and Acala.

Managed Service Dependency: The core service is centralized, with decentralization (SubQuery Network) still in active development. This matters for enterprise or DeFi protocols with strict sovereignty requirements who cannot rely on a single point of failure long-term.

Deterministic pricing: SubQuery's managed service offers fixed-price plans, avoiding The Graph's variable query fee market. Indexing is ~30% faster for initial syncs on comparable chains due to a multi-threaded worker design. This matters for startups with tight budgets and applications needing consistent, low-latency data (< 500ms p95).

Smaller decentralized network: While growing, SubQuery's decentralized network has fewer indexed subgraphs (~500+) and less staked value compared to The Graph's ~800+ indexers and $2B+ in total stake. This matters for protocols prioritizing maximal censorship resistance and battle-tested, multi-provider query reliability.

Simpler, non-essential token: The SQT token primarily governs the decentralized network, whereas query payment can be in fiat on the managed service. Contrast with The Graph's GRT, which is fundamental for all payments and security. This matters for dApps wanting to avoid token volatility exposure, but reduces Sybil resistance for the decentralized service.