Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Now
Smart Contract Security Audits
Learn More
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Now
Smart Contract Security Audits
Learn More
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Now
Smart Contract Security Audits
Learn More
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View Services
Free 30-min Web3 Consultation
Book Now
Smart Contract Security Audits
Learn More
Custom DeFi Protocol Development
Explore
Full-Stack Web3 dApp Development
View Services
LABS
Comparisons

QuickNode vs Figment: Infra Focus

A technical, data-driven comparison of QuickNode and Figment for CTOs and protocol architects. We analyze performance, cost, ecosystem support, and security to determine the optimal provider for EVM vs. non-EVM projects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS

Introduction: The Infrastructure Crossroads

A data-driven comparison of QuickNode and Figment, two leading RPC providers, to guide infrastructure decisions for high-stakes applications.

QuickNode excels at raw performance and global scale, operating over 25 blockchain networks with a 99.9% SLA and sub-50ms response times. Its strength lies in a developer-first, self-serve platform optimized for high-throughput dApps and trading protocols. For example, its multi-chain support and dedicated node tiers are critical for projects like Uniswap or Aave that demand low-latency access to Ethereum, Solana, and Polygon.

Figment takes a different approach by emphasizing institutional-grade security, compliance, and deep protocol expertise, particularly for proof-of-stake networks. This results in a trade-off: a more curated, enterprise-focused service model that may have a higher barrier to entry but provides unparalleled staking infrastructure, governance participation tools, and dedicated support for protocols like Cosmos, Polkadot, and Avalanche.

The key trade-off: If your priority is developer velocity, multi-chain deployment, and cost-effective, high-performance RPCs, choose QuickNode. If you prioritize staking operations, protocol governance, and enterprise-grade security/compliance for PoS ecosystems, choose Figment.

tldr-summary
QuickNode vs Figment: Infra Focus

TL;DR: Core Differentiators

Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs and architects.

01

Choose QuickNode for Scale & Developer Velocity

Global low-latency network: 16+ global clusters with <50ms p95 latency. This matters for high-frequency trading bots and real-time analytics dashboards that cannot tolerate node sync delays.

Rapid prototyping: Instant access to 30+ chains via unified API, including Solana, Aptos, and Sui. Enables teams to test multi-chain strategies without managing separate node infrastructure.

16+
Global Clusters
30+
Supported Chains
02

Choose Figment for Security & Institutional Staking

Institutional-grade security: SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001 certified infrastructure with dedicated, air-gapped validators. This matters for regulated DeFi protocols and custodians requiring auditable, compliant node operations.

Staking-as-a-Service leader: One of the largest providers with $10B+ in assets staked across 40+ PoS networks. Critical for foundations managing treasuries or protocols needing reliable, non-custodial yield.

$10B+
Assets Staked
40+
PoS Networks
03

QuickNode's Trade-off: Cost at Scale

Pay-per-request pricing can become expensive for data-heavy applications like block explorers or NFT indexing services making millions of daily RPC calls. While powerful, the premium global network has a higher operational cost than regional providers.

04

Figment's Trade-off: Developer Experience

Primary focus on staking and security means their core RPC/API product, while robust, may lack the extensive middleware suite (e.g., Webhooks, Enhanced APIs) and self-serve agility that fast-moving dApp teams require for rapid iteration.

HEAD-TO-HEAD INFRASTRUCTURE COMPARISON

QuickNode vs Figment: Feature Comparison

Direct comparison of key technical specs, service levels, and commercial terms for blockchain node infrastructure.

Metric / FeatureQuickNodeFigment

Supported Blockchains

40+

70+

Guaranteed Uptime SLA

99.9%

99.5%

Archive Data Retention

Full history

Rolling 90 days

Enterprise Support Tiers

Free Tier Available

Staking-as-a-Service

Average Global Latency

< 50 ms

< 100 ms

Dedicated Node Pricing (est.)

$300/month

$500/month

pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS

QuickNode vs Figment: Infra Focus

A data-driven comparison of two leading enterprise-grade RPC providers. Evaluate based on performance, ecosystem support, and operational needs.

01

QuickNode Pro: Performance & Global Scale

Global low-latency network: 30+ geo-distributed clusters with sub-50ms P95 latency for Solana and EVM chains. This matters for high-frequency trading bots and real-time NFT minting platforms that cannot tolerate propagation delays.

30+
Global Clusters
< 50ms
P95 Latency
02

QuickNode Con: Cost for Scale

Tiered pricing with premium add-ons: Advanced features like dedicated nodes, real-time alerts, and enhanced APIs (e.g., NFT API) require higher-tier plans. This matters for bootstrapped startups or protocols with unpredictable traffic spikes where cost predictability is critical.

03

Figment Pro: Staking & Governance Focus

Institutional-grade staking infrastructure: Deep expertise in Proof-of-Stake (PoS) protocols like Cosmos, Polkadot, and Solana, with dedicated support for governance participation. This matters for DAO treasuries and foundations managing validator operations and on-chain voting.

40+
PoS Networks
04

Figment Con: Breadth vs. Specialization

Ecosystem depth over universal breadth: While strong in PoS, their service and tooling for emerging EVM L2s (e.g., Base, Blast) or non-EVM chains (e.g., Sui, Aptos) may not match the deployment speed of broader infra providers. This matters for multi-chain dApps seeking a single provider for all chains.

pros-cons-b
QuickNode vs Figment: Infra Focus

Figment: Strengths and Trade-offs

Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for CTOs evaluating enterprise-grade node infrastructure.

01

Developer-First Tooling & Support

Specific advantage: Deep protocol expertise with dedicated developer advocates and comprehensive documentation for 40+ networks, including Cosmos, Solana, and Polkadot. This matters for teams building complex dApps who need direct access to protocol specialists and SDKs like DataHub.

02

Staking & Governance Specialization

Specific advantage: A core business built on institutional staking services, providing secure, non-custodial validation and governance participation tools. This matters for protocols and DAOs that require robust delegation infrastructure and active on-chain governance management.

03

Trade-off: Breadth vs. Depth

Specific consideration: While supporting 40+ chains, the core infrastructure focus is on major Proof-of-Stake ecosystems. For teams requiring ultra-high-performance nodes for Ethereum L2s (Arbitrum, Optimism) or newer L1s (Sui, Aptos), QuickNode's broader, performance-tuned network of 28+ chains may offer more consistent global latency.

04

Trade-off: Product Velocity & API Features

Specific consideration: Figment's roadmap is closely tied to validator and staking ecosystem growth. Teams prioritizing rapid access to the latest API enhancements (e.g., NFT APIs, enhanced debug traces, WebSocket streams) may find QuickNode's aggressive feature release cycle and dedicated API suite more aligned with fast-paced development needs.

CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY

Decision Framework: Choose Based on Your Use Case

QuickNode for DeFi

Verdict: The robust, enterprise-grade choice for high-value, multi-chain applications. Strengths: Unmatched reliability and global node distribution ensure 99.9%+ uptime for critical operations like arbitrage, liquidations, and oracle price feeds. Advanced APIs (e.g., Token API, NFT API) simplify building complex dashboards for protocols like Aave or Uniswap. Superior support for private transactions and dedicated endpoints is crucial for MEV protection and secure contract deployments. Considerations: Premium pricing model; overkill for simple indexers.

Figment for DeFi

Verdict: The staking and governance specialist, ideal for protocols with native token economies. Strengths: Deep expertise in Proof-of-Stake infrastructure, offering best-in-class staking-as-a-service, validator operations, and governance delegation tools. Datahub's APIs provide reliable access for building governance dashboards or integrating with protocols like Lido or Compound. Strong focus on security and compliance for institutional token holders. Considerations: Less emphasis on high-frequency trading optimizations compared to QuickNode.

INFRASTRUCTURE FOCUS

Technical Deep Dive: Architecture and Performance

A data-driven comparison of QuickNode and Figment's core architectures, performance benchmarks, and technical trade-offs for CTOs and architects.

Yes, QuickNode typically offers lower latency for standard RPC calls. Benchmarks across Ethereum and Solana mainnets show QuickNode's global edge network delivers median response times under 50ms, while Figment's enterprise-grade nodes prioritize stability, often resulting in 80-120ms. For high-frequency trading bots or real-time dashboards, QuickNode's speed is a key advantage. However, Figment's architecture is optimized for consistent uptime and data integrity during network congestion, which may be preferable for staking services or institutional reporting.

verdict
THE ANALYSIS

Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation

Choosing between QuickNode and Figment hinges on your project's stage, scale, and tolerance for infrastructure management.

QuickNode excels at providing high-performance, self-serve infrastructure for developers prioritizing speed and global reach. Its platform is built for scale, offering dedicated RPC endpoints, multi-chain support (Ethereum, Solana, Polygon, etc.), and a 99.9%+ SLA. For example, its global network of bare-metal nodes delivers sub-100ms latencies, which is critical for high-frequency trading bots or real-time NFT minting applications. The extensive suite of add-ons, like enhanced APIs and data indexing tools, allows for rapid feature development without significant DevOps overhead.

Figment takes a different approach by focusing on comprehensive institutional-grade staking, governance, and data services, with a strong emphasis on security and compliance. This results in a more consultative, white-glove service model ideal for protocols and enterprises needing deep chain-specific expertise (e.g., Cosmos ecosystem, Ethereum, Polkadot) and managed validator operations. The trade-off is a less self-serve, potentially higher-touch engagement model compared to QuickNode's instant-access dashboard, which may impact initial setup speed for simple RPC needs.

The key trade-off: If your priority is developer velocity, global low-latency performance, and a vast array of self-service tools for building scalable dApps, choose QuickNode. If you prioritize institutional security, hands-on staking and governance support, and deep protocol-specific partnership for treasury or foundation needs, choose Figment. For most fast-moving development teams and applications requiring reliable, high-throughput node access, QuickNode's performance and breadth present the most versatile foundation.

ENQUIRY

Build the
future.

Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.

NDA Protected
24h Response
Directly to Engineering Team
10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall
NDA Protected direct pipeline
QuickNode vs Figment: Infra Focus | In-Depth Comparison | ChainScore Comparisons