RedStone excels at modularity and cost-efficiency because it decouples data sourcing from on-chain delivery. Its pull-based oracle pushes signed data to a decentralized cache layer (like Arweave or the RedStone Data Access API), allowing dApps to fetch and verify data on-demand. This results in dramatically lower gas costs—often 90% less than push oracles—and supports thousands of assets. For example, a protocol like Swell Network uses RedStone for efficient LST price feeds, minimizing operational overhead.
LABS
Comparisons
RedStone vs Pyth: Beyond Prices
A technical analysis comparing RedStone's modular pull-based oracle with Pyth's low-latency push model. We break down architectural trade-offs, data type support, cost structures, and security models to help CTOs and protocol architects select the optimal data infrastructure.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Core Architectural Divide
RedStone and Pyth represent two fundamentally different philosophies for delivering high-fidelity data to smart contracts.
Pyth takes a different approach by building a high-frequency, push-based network of first-party data from major institutions (like Jane Street and CBOE). This strategy prioritizes ultra-low latency and institutional-grade data for high-stakes DeFi. Data is aggregated and pushed on-chain every 400ms on Solana and with sub-second finality on Pythnet, resulting in superior freshness for perpetuals and options trading. The trade-off is higher on-chain gas costs and a more curated, albeit highly reputable, data provider set.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing asset coverage, minimizing gas costs, and architectural flexibility (especially on L2s or app-chains), choose RedStone. If you prioritize sub-second price updates, institutional data provenance, and are building high-performance derivatives or money markets where latency is critical, choose Pyth.
tldr-summary
RedStone vs Pyth: Beyond Prices
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A data-driven comparison of architectural models, cost structures, and protocol-level integrations to guide infrastructure decisions.
01
RedStone: Modular & Cost-Effective
Pull-based data delivery: Data is fetched on-demand via Arweave, drastically reducing gas costs for protocols. This matters for high-frequency, low-margin DeFi where every transaction counts.
Multi-chain native: Uses a universal data format, enabling seamless deployment across 50+ chains (EVM, Cosmos, Solana) without custom integrations.
Developer flexibility: Offers multiple integration patterns (RedStone Core, RedStone Classic, RedStone X) to fit your stack.
02
Pyth: High-Frequency & Low-Latency
Push-based oracle network: Data is pushed on-chain via Pythnet, achieving sub-second updates. This matters for perpetuals, options, and spot trading where price latency is critical.
First-party data: Aggregates directly from 90+ major exchanges and trading firms (e.g., Jane Street, CBOE), providing institutional-grade sources.
Solana-native performance: Optimized for high-throughput environments, supporting >1M price updates per day with proven reliability.
03
Choose RedStone If...
- You're deploying a new app on an L2 or emerging chain and need cheap, universal price feeds.
- Your budget is constrained and you prioritize low, predictable data costs over ultra-low latency.
- You need custom data types beyond crypto prices (e.g., FX rates, weather, sports outcomes) via its modular design.
04
Choose Pyth If...
- You're building a high-performance DEX or derivatives protocol where latency is a competitive edge.
- You require maximum security and institutional data provenance for multi-billion dollar TVL applications.
- Your primary ecosystem is Solana or a high-throughput SVM chain, where its native integration is unbeatable.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
RedStone vs Pyth: Oracle Feature Comparison
Direct comparison of key architectural and operational metrics for decentralized oracles.
| Metric | RedStone | Pyth |
|---|---|---|
Data Delivery Model | Pull-based (On-Demand) | Push-based (Continuous) |
Supported Data Types | Price, Custom, Off-Chain | Price, Volatility, TWAP |
Data Sources per Feed | 50+ | 90+ |
Avg. Update Latency | < 1 sec | < 400 ms |
Gas Cost per Update (Ethereum) | $0.10 - $0.50 | $0.50 - $2.00 |
Native Cross-Chain Support | ||
Permissionless Data Publishing | ||
Mainnet Launch | 2021 | 2021 |
REDSTONE VS. PYTH
Technical Deep Dive: Pull vs. Push Mechanics
Beyond price feeds, the core architectural choice between pull (RedStone) and push (Pyth) models dictates latency, cost, and composability for your protocol. This analysis breaks down the technical trade-offs for engineering leaders.
Pyth provides faster on-chain finality. Pyth's push model updates prices directly on-chain via its Pythnet Solana program, with updates typically finalizing in ~400ms. RedStone's pull model requires a relayer to post data on-demand, adding a request latency layer; finality depends on the underlying chain's block time (e.g., ~12s on Ethereum). For high-frequency trading on low-latency chains like Solana, Pyth's push model is superior. For less time-sensitive applications on general-purpose L1s, RedStone's flexibility can be sufficient.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose Which: Decision by Use Case
RedStone for DeFi
Verdict: The modular, cost-effective choice for composable, multi-chain applications. Strengths:
- Gasless Data Feeds: RedStone's pull-based model (e.g.,
RedStoneCore) allows contracts to fetch data on-demand, eliminating continuous gas costs for price updates. Ideal for L2s like Arbitrum or Optimism where calldata is cheap. - Extensive Asset Coverage: Supports 1,000+ assets, including long-tail and LSDs (e.g., stETH, rETH), crucial for niche lending markets or exotic derivatives.
- Composable Data: Can bundle multiple data points (price, volatility, TWAP) into a single signed data package, enabling complex on-chain logic for protocols like GMX or Synthetix.
Consider: Requires integrating a consumer contract (like
PriceFeedWithRounds) to verify and store data, adding minor implementation overhead.
Pyth for DeFi
Verdict: The high-frequency, low-latency standard for latency-sensitive, high-value applications. Strengths:
- Sub-Second Updates & Low Latency: Push-based updates with ~400ms latency are critical for perpetual futures (e.g., Hyperliquid, Drift) and money markets where liquidation efficiency is paramount.
- Institutional-Grade Data: Aggregates from 90+ first-party publishers (Jump Trading, Jane Street), providing high-fidelity data for multi-billion dollar protocols like Venus and Morpho.
- Battle-Tested Security: The Pythnet attestation consensus and on-chain wormhole verification provide a robust security model for mainnet DeFi with significant TVL at risk. Consider: Update fees are paid by the publisher, which can be cost-prohibitive for less critical or low-volume assets.
pros-cons-a
ARCHITECTURAL TRADE-OFFS
RedStone vs Pyth: Beyond Prices
A data-driven comparison of two leading oracle designs. Pyth dominates mainstream DeFi, while RedStone unlocks novel architectures for L2s and app-chains.
01
RedStone's Modular Pull Oracle
On-demand data delivery: Data is pushed to a decentralized cache (like Arweave) and pulled on-chain only when needed via a signed data package. This drastically reduces L1 gas costs for high-frequency data feeds. This matters for cost-sensitive L2s and app-chains that require hundreds of price feeds without incurring prohibitive on-chain update fees.
<$0.01
Avg. update cost
1000+
Feeds supported
02
Pyth's Push Oracle & Network
Low-latency, high-frequency updates: Data is continuously pushed on-chain by a permissioned network of ~90 first-party publishers (Jump Crypto, Jane Street). This provides sub-second updates and deep liquidity coverage, which is critical for perpetual futures DEXs (like Hyperliquid, Drift Protocol) and money markets where stale prices directly lead to liquidations and arbitrage.
<500ms
Update latency
$2.5B+
Secured TVL
pros-cons-b
RedStone vs Pyth: Beyond Prices
Pyth: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance. Use this to decide which oracle's architecture fits your protocol's needs.
01
Pyth's Strength: Institutional Data Integrity
First-party data from 90+ major institutions like Jane Street and CBOE. This direct sourcing eliminates aggregation layers, providing high-fidelity price feeds with verifiable provenance. This matters for high-value DeFi protocols (e.g., perpetuals on Solana) where data manipulation resistance is paramount.
90+
First-Party Publishers
02
Pyth's Strength: Sub-Second Latency on Fast Chains
Optimized for high-throughput L1s/L2s like Solana and Sui. Updates occur on-chain with ~400ms latency, enabling protocols to react to market movements in near real-time. This matters for low-latency trading applications, options pricing, and money markets that require the freshest data.
~400ms
Update Latency
03
Pyth's Trade-off: Chain Coverage & Cost
Native support is strongest on Solana, with expansion to ~15 chains via Wormhole. Deploying Pyth on a new chain requires custom integration, which can be resource-intensive. Pull oracle updates also incur gas costs on the consumer chain. This matters for multi-chain dApps on emerging L2s or teams with limited engineering bandwidth for oracle integration.
04
Pyth's Trade-off: Data Diversity & Customization
Focuses primarily on highly liquid financial markets (crypto, equities, forex, commodities). The model is less suited for niche, long-tail assets or fully customized data feeds. Protocols cannot directly incentivize publishers for specific data. This matters for NFTfi, prediction markets, or RWA protocols needing bespoke data sets.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
A data-driven breakdown to help CTOs choose between RedStone's modular flexibility and Pyth's institutional-grade security.
RedStone excels at cost-effective, high-frequency data delivery for L2s and emerging ecosystems because of its modular, pull-based architecture. For example, its integration with Arbitrum, Base, and zkSync leverages native gas optimizations, allowing protocols to fetch data on-demand and avoid the continuous streaming costs of push oracles. This model is ideal for applications requiring hundreds of specialized price feeds (e.g., LSTs, RWA tokens) without paying for unused data.
Pyth takes a different approach by prioritizing low-latency, high-assurance data through a first-party publisher network of 90+ major exchanges and trading firms. This results in a trade-off: superior security and speed (updates in ~400ms on Solana) at a premium cost and with a more curated, albeit extensive, feed list. Its pull oracle solution, Pyth Pull, offers an alternative for cost-conscious deployments but maintains the core security model.
The key trade-off: If your priority is developer sovereignty, multi-chain deployment agility, and minimizing operational costs for a bespoke dApp, choose RedStone. Its data feeds SDK and support for EVM, Cosmos, and Starknet provide unparalleled flexibility. If you prioritize battle-tested security, sub-second finality for high-frequency trading (HFT) applications, and institutional credibility, choose Pyth. Its $2.5B+ in total value secured (TVS) and dominance in the Solana DeFi ecosystem (e.g., Jupiter, Drift) are testament to its robustness for mission-critical financial logic.
ENQUIRY
Build the
future.
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