Tellor excels at decentralization and censorship resistance because it uses a permissionless network of staked miners competing to submit data on-chain, secured by its native TRB token and a dispute mechanism. For example, its network has maintained 100% uptime since launch, with data secured by a $50+ million staked value (TVL). This model prioritizes security and sovereignty, making it a fit for protocols like Liquity that require maximal resistance to manipulation.
LABS
Comparisons
Tellor vs Pyth: A Technical Breakdown of Oracle Control Models
This analysis compares the core architectural and governance differences between Tellor's permissionless, staking-based pull oracle and Pyth's permissioned, publisher-based push oracle. We evaluate security assumptions, cost structures, and optimal use cases for CTOs and protocol architects.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Fundamental Trade-off in Oracle Design
The choice between Tellor and Pyth represents a foundational decision between decentralized, censorship-resistant data and high-speed, institutional-grade price feeds.
Pyth takes a different approach by aggregating price data off-chain from over 90 first-party publishers (e.g., Jane Street, CBOE) before publishing a single aggregated value on-chain via its Wormhole-based cross-chain messaging. This results in a trade-off: it achieves sub-second latency and high-frequency updates (e.g., 400+ ms for Solana) but introduces reliance on a permissioned set of professional data providers and the security of the Wormhole bridge.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximal decentralization, censorship resistance, and on-chain dispute resolution for non-price data or novel assets, choose Tellor. If you prioritize ultra-low latency, high-throughput price feeds for mainstream assets, and deep institutional liquidity, choose Pyth. The former is for builders valuing sovereign security; the latter is for applications needing professional market data at the speed of DeFi.
tldr-summary
Tellor vs Pyth: Control Models
TL;DR: Core Differentiators at a Glance
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance.
01
Tellor: Decentralized & Permissionless
Permissionless Data Submission: Anyone can run a reporter node and stake TRB to submit data. This creates a censorship-resistant network where data is secured by economic staking, not a whitelist. This matters for protocols prioritizing sovereignty and long-term credibly neutrality, like Liquity or other DeFi primitives.
100+
Active Reporters
03
Pyth: High-Performance & Institutional
First-Party Publisher Network: Data is supplied directly by 90+ major institutions (e.g., Jane Street, CBOE, Binance). This provides high-fidelity, low-latency data with strong provenance. This matters for high-frequency trading and institutional-grade DeFi applications like perpetual futures on Synthetix or Drift Protocol.
90+
First-Party Publishers
350+
Price Feeds
TELLOR VS PYTH
Head-to-Head: Control Model Feature Matrix
Direct comparison of oracle control models, data sourcing, and key operational metrics.
| Metric | Tellor | Pyth |
|---|---|---|
Control Model | Decentralized, Permissionless | Permissioned, Publisher Network |
Data Sourcing | Staked Reporters (anyone) | Approved Institutional Publishers |
Data Update Frequency | ~10 minutes (on-demand) | < 1 second (continuous) |
Price Feeds Available | ~150+ | 500+ |
On-chain Gas Cost (Avg.) | $5-15 | $0.05-0.15 |
Slashing for Bad Data | ||
Native Cross-Chain Support |
pros-cons-a
DECENTRALIZED VS. INSTITUTIONAL
Tellor (TRIB) vs Pyth: Control Models
A direct comparison of the governance and operational models for two leading oracle solutions. Choose based on your protocol's need for censorship resistance or high-frequency institutional data.
01
Tellor: Permissionless & Censorship-Resistant
Decentralized staking model: Anyone can stake TRIB to become a data reporter, competing for rewards. This eliminates single points of failure and aligns with DeFi's trust-minimization ethos.
Key for: Protocols requiring maximum uptime guarantees and neutrality, especially in adversarial conditions or for politically sensitive data feeds (e.g., cross-chain governance).
100+
Active Reporters
02
Tellor: Predictable, On-Chain Cost Model
Fixed query costs: Gas fees and TRIB tips are transparent and paid per on-chain data request. No surprise bills or subscription models.
Key for: Protocols with predictable, batchable data needs (e.g., lending protocol liquidation checks, weekly reward calculations) where budgeting and cost certainty are critical.
03
Pyth: High-Frequency, Low-Latency Data
First-party institutional data: Pulls data directly from 90+ major trading firms and institutions (e.g., Jane Street, CBOE). Enables sub-second price updates for assets like equities, ETFs, and forex.
Key for: Perpetual futures DEXs, options platforms, and any application where millisecond-level market data is a competitive necessity.
90+
Data Publishers
< 500ms
Update Latency
04
Pyth: Pull Oracle & Cross-Chain Efficiency
Pull-based architecture: Consumers "pull" verified price updates on-demand from the Pythnet appchain, paying only when they need data. This data is then relayed to 40+ blockchains via Wormhole.
Key for: Multi-chain DeFi ecosystems and new L2s seeking immediate, cost-effective access to a broad suite of institutional-grade price feeds without maintaining individual oracle contracts.
40+
Supported Chains
pros-cons-b
Tellor vs Pyth: Control Models
Pyth (PYTH): Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance. Pyth's pull-based model contrasts with Tellor's push-based, permissionless approach.
01
Pyth's Pull-Based Efficiency
High-throughput, low-latency data: Aggregates data from 90+ first-party publishers (e.g., CBOE, Binance) into a single on-chain price. This matters for high-frequency DeFi (e.g., perpetuals on Solana) requiring sub-second updates and 400+ price feeds.
400+
Price Feeds
< 1 sec
Update Latency
02
Pyth's Publisher-Curated Security
First-party, vetted data sources: Relies on established financial institutions and exchanges as publishers, reducing Sybil attack risk. This matters for institutional-grade protocols (e.g., Synthetix, MarginFi) where data provenance and reliability are paramount over pure decentralization.
90+
First-Party Publishers
03
Tellor's Permissionless Robustness
Censorship-resistant, push-based model: Any staked miner can submit data, secured by a Proof-of-Work/Tribute system. This matters for long-tail assets or niche data where no major publisher exists, ensuring data availability even if Pyth's curated network doesn't support it.
Permissionless
Miner Entry
04
Tellor's Decentralized Cost Structure
Predictable, user-paid query fees: Data requests are fulfilled by miners competing for TRB rewards, creating a market-driven cost. This matters for budget-conscious dApps or those requiring custom data types (beyond price feeds) where fixed, upfront cost modeling is essential.
TRB Staked
Security Model
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Model
Tellor for DeFi
Verdict: Choose for permissionless, censorship-resistant price feeds where data sovereignty is non-negotiable. Strengths:
- Decentralized Security: No single point of failure; relies on a permissionless network of staked reporters (PoW + PoS).
- Data Sovereignty: You control the data request logic and dispute resolution, ideal for novel assets or long-tail markets.
- Battle-Tested: Secures major protocols like Liquity and Synthetix. Trade-offs: Higher gas costs per update, slower oracle update frequency (minutes).
Pyth for DeFi
Verdict: Choose for high-frequency, low-latency data where market precision is critical. Strengths:
- Performance: Sub-second updates and low-latency pull oracle model via Pythnet.
- Institutional Data: Aggregates first-party data from 90+ major exchanges and trading firms.
- Cost-Efficiency: Lower on-chain costs for consumers via batch updates and Solana/EVM composability. Trade-offs: Relies on a permissioned set of initial data providers; governance is more centralized.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
Choosing between Tellor and Pyth hinges on your protocol's tolerance for decentralization risk versus its need for ultra-low-latency, institutional-grade data.
Tellor excels at permissionless, censorship-resistant data feeds because its security model is based on a decentralized network of staked reporters competing in a Proof-of-Work-style challenge. For example, its TellorFlex architecture allows any user to request and fund a new data feed, making it uniquely suited for long-tail assets or bespoke data types not covered by mainstream oracles. This model prioritizes credible neutrality and protocol sovereignty over raw speed, with finality times typically measured in minutes.
Pyth takes a different approach by operating a high-performance, publisher-curated network. This strategy aggregates first-party data from over 90 major financial institutions and exchanges (like Jane Street and CBOE), resulting in sub-second price updates and deep liquidity coverage for mainstream assets. The trade-off is a more permissioned, reputation-based security model where data quality is managed by the Pyth Data Association, offering exceptional performance but with a different trust profile than pure crypto-economic security.
The key trade-off: If your priority is maximizing decentralization and censorship resistance for novel assets, choose Tellor. Its staked, permissionless reporter model is a strategic fit for protocols valuing sovereignty above all else. If you prioritize ultra-low-latency, high-frequency data for established crypto and traditional markets, choose Pyth. Its publisher network delivers the speed and institutional depth required by high-performance DeFi applications like perpetual futures on Solana or Avalanche.
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