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

Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking Services

A technical comparison of Figment and Blockdaemon for CTOs and protocol architects, analyzing multi-chain support, SLAs, security, and institutional tooling to inform infrastructure decisions.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS

Introduction: The Enterprise Staking Infrastructure Decision

A data-driven comparison of Figment and Blockdaemon, the leading institutional staking service providers, to guide CTOs on infrastructure selection.

Figment excels at developer-centric tooling and multi-chain support because of its deep investment in APIs, data products, and protocol research. For example, its Hubble suite provides comprehensive staking analytics and its DataHub API service supports over 50 networks, including Ethereum, Solana, and Cosmos, enabling rapid dApp integration. This focus makes Figment a prime choice for protocols and teams building complex applications that require granular data access and custom integrations.

Blockdaemon takes a different approach by prioritizing enterprise-grade security, compliance, and node infrastructure management. This results in a trade-off between deep customization and turnkey, audited reliability. Blockdaemon's strength lies in its institutional client roster, proprietary node orchestration layer, and strong compliance frameworks (SOC 2 Type II, ISO 27001). Its infrastructure supports high-value assets with a reported 99.9%+ uptime SLA and direct integrations with custody solutions like Fireblocks and Copper.

The key trade-off: If your priority is rapid multi-chain deployment, developer APIs, and data sovereignty for a bespoke stack, choose Figment. If you prioritize institutional-grade security, regulatory compliance, and a fully managed, hands-off node infrastructure with proven reliability for large-scale treasury assets, choose Blockdaemon.

tldr-summary
Figment vs Blockdaemon

TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance

A high-level comparison of institutional staking providers, focusing on core architectural and service model differences.

01

Figment's Strength: Protocol Breadth & Research

Deep multi-chain support: Validates over 60+ protocols (e.g., Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, Avalanche, Polkadot). Their DataHub API suite provides unified access to node infrastructure, crucial for developers building cross-chain applications. This matters for funds or institutions needing exposure to a diverse portfolio of Proof-of-Stake assets without managing separate vendor relationships.

02

Figment's Strength: Developer-First Tooling

Comprehensive API & SDK ecosystem: Offers REST APIs, WebSockets, and language-specific SDKs for seamless integration. Their focus on educational resources (Learn & Earn) and developer support lowers the barrier for teams building on new chains. This matters for protocol teams and fintechs that prioritize integration speed and developer experience over purely hands-off custody solutions.

03

Blockdaemon's Strength: Enterprise Security & Compliance

Institutional-grade security posture: Features like HSM-backed key management, SOC 2 Type II compliance, and dedicated, isolated node clusters. Their architecture is built for regulated entities requiring the highest audit and security standards. This matters for large custodians, banks, and publicly-traded companies where regulatory compliance is non-negotiable.

04

Blockdaemon's Strength: Scalability & Node Orchestration

Kubernetes-based node management via their Ubiquity platform allows for automated deployment, scaling, and monitoring of validator nodes across clouds and regions. Provides superior operational resilience and uptime guarantees (99.9%+ SLA). This matters for institutions staking at massive scale (e.g., 100,000+ ETH) who cannot afford slashing risks due to infrastructure failure.

HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON

Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking Services

Direct comparison of key metrics and features for enterprise-grade staking infrastructure.

MetricFigmentBlockdaemon

Supported Networks

70+

90+

Institutional SLAs

Non-Custodial Key Management

Native Restaking Support

MEV Optimization Services

Ethereum, Solana

Ethereum, Cosmos, Solana

Annual Staking Fee Range

5-15%

7-20%

Dedicated Node Provisioning

pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS ANALYSIS

Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking Services

A data-driven comparison of leading institutional staking providers. Evaluate strengths and trade-offs for protocol selection and infrastructure migration.

01

Figment's Protocol-First Focus

Deep protocol integration: Specializes in supporting emerging Layer 1s and appchains (e.g., Celestia, NEAR, Cosmos). This matters for institutions building on or investing in newer ecosystems that require sophisticated validator services beyond simple delegation.

02

Blockdaemon's Enterprise Breadth

Unmatched node coverage: Operates 70+ blockchain networks and 40,000+ nodes. This matters for large institutions (e.g., Kraken, Coinbase) needing a single, unified dashboard for staking, node orchestration, and monitoring across a diverse multi-chain portfolio.

03

Figment's Governance Overhead

Active governance requirement: Clients must actively participate in protocol upgrades and voting. This matters for passive asset managers or funds who prefer a fully hands-off custody and staking solution, as it adds operational complexity.

04

Blockdaemon's Cost Structure

Premium pricing for scale: Enterprise SLAs and dedicated infrastructure come at a significant cost premium over retail staking services. This matters for smaller institutions or protocols with tight infrastructure budgets, where cost-per-validator is a primary constraint.

pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS ANALYSIS

Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking Services

A data-driven comparison of two leading institutional-grade staking providers. Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs managing high-value crypto assets.

01

Figment's Strength: Protocol Breadth & Developer Focus

Extensive multi-chain support: Validator services for 40+ networks including Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, and Polkadot. This matters for institutions building cross-chain strategies or managing a diversified portfolio. Strong developer tools like the Hubble Web3 Data API and Learn program provide added value beyond basic staking.

02

Figment's Trade-off: Enterprise-First Complexity

Tailored for large-scale clients with custom SLAs and dedicated account management. This can mean a higher barrier to entry and less self-service for smaller teams. The focus on bespoke solutions may not be ideal for projects seeking a simple, off-the-shelf staking setup.

03

Blockdaemon's Strength: Infrastructure Scale & Automation

Unmatched node deployment scale: Manages over 50,000 nodes with a strong emphasis on automation and reliability. This matters for institutions requiring high uptime (99.9%+ SLA) and operational efficiency for large validator sets. Their institutional-grade security with MPC custody and HSM integration is a key differentiator.

04

Blockdaemon's Trade-off: Potential Cost Premium

Enterprise-grade services command a premium. While pricing is custom, the extensive infrastructure, security audits, and compliance features (like SOC 2 Type II) likely result in higher costs compared to retail-focused providers. This is a trade-off for the robustness and peace of mind offered.

05

Figment's Strength: Governance & Research

Deep protocol involvement: Provides detailed governance research and voting services for networks like Cosmos and Polkadot. This matters for institutions that want to actively participate in network decisions and maximize staking rewards beyond basic yield.

06

Blockdaemon's Strength: Unified Dashboard & APIs

Single-pane-of-glass management: Offers a unified platform (Blockdaemon Portal) and robust APIs to monitor and manage staking across all supported chains. This matters for operational teams needing consolidated reporting, alerts, and key management for hundreds of validator nodes.

CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY

Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Provider

Figment for Security & Compliance

Verdict: The institutional standard for regulated entities. Strengths: Figment's core differentiator is its enterprise-grade security posture. It offers SOC 2 Type II certification, dedicated HSM-based key management, and comprehensive on-chain governance support with detailed voting analytics. Their DataHub API provides reliable, SLA-backed access to over 40 networks, crucial for applications requiring audit trails and regulatory reporting. For protocols like Ethereum, Cosmos Hub, or Polkadot where governance participation is a key staking function, Figment's tooling is superior.

Blockdaemon for Security & Compliance

Verdict: A strong, scalable alternative with a broader infrastructure focus. Strengths: Blockdaemon provides robust security via its Ubiquity platform, featuring multi-cloud, multi-region redundancy. They emphasize non-custodial solutions and offer institutional-grade key management options. Their compliance story is bolstered by support for a vast array of 70+ protocols, allowing a unified dashboard for reporting. However, they may not match Figment's depth of specialized governance tooling for specific chains.

verdict
THE ANALYSIS

Final Verdict and Recommendation

Choosing between Figment and Blockdaemon hinges on your institution's primary need: developer-centric flexibility or enterprise-grade operational scale.

Figment excels at providing a developer-first, multi-chain staking infrastructure because of its deep protocol integrations and DataHub API suite. For example, its support for over 40+ networks, including Ethereum, Cosmos, and Solana, is complemented by tools like the Hubble validator analytics platform, giving developers granular control and data transparency for building on-chain applications.

Blockdaemon takes a different approach by prioritizing enterprise-grade security, compliance, and global infrastructure. This results in a trade-off of less focus on public developer tools but offers superior institutional assurances like SOC 2 Type II certification, dedicated node clusters, and a 99.9%+ uptime SLA backed by its global footprint across 40+ cloud regions.

The key trade-off: If your priority is rapid protocol integration, developer tooling, and building applications that require direct chain interaction, choose Figment. If you prioritize institutional security, regulatory compliance, and bulletproof node reliability for large-scale treasury or custody operations, choose Blockdaemon.

ENQUIRY

Get In Touch
today.

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 Directly to Engineering Team
Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking Services Comparison | ChainScore Comparisons