Pyth excels at ultra-low-latency, on-chain price delivery for high-frequency applications because it uses a first-party data model where publishers push signed price updates directly to a Pyth-managed on-chain program. For example, its Solana implementation can achieve sub-second price updates, making it the dominant oracle for perpetuals DEXs like Drift and Hyperliquid, which collectively handle billions in daily volume. This performance is underpinned by a high-throughput network of over 90 premium data publishers.
LABS
Comparisons
Pyth vs RedStone: Oracle Latency
A technical comparison of Pyth Network's push-based oracle and RedStone's pull-based oracle, focusing on latency, data delivery models, and architectural trade-offs for high-performance DeFi applications.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Latency Imperative for DeFi Oracles
A head-to-head comparison of Pyth and RedStone's architectural approaches to data freshness and delivery speed.
RedStone takes a different approach by decoupling data availability from on-chain consensus, using a pull-based model. Data is stored in decentralized storage like Arweave and relayed on-demand via a meta-transaction. This results in a critical trade-off: significantly lower operational costs and broader asset coverage (over 1000+ feeds) at the expense of introducing a 1-2 minute latency window for price finality. This architecture is optimal for less latency-sensitive protocols like lending (Aave, Morpho) or index products.
The key trade-off: If your priority is sub-second price finality for derivatives, perpetuals, or high-frequency swaps, choose Pyth. Its on-chain push model is built for speed. If you prioritize cost-efficiency, extensive asset coverage, and can tolerate a 1-2 minute data latency, choose RedStone. Its pull-based design offers superior scalability for a wider range of DeFi primitives.
tldr-summary
Pyth vs RedStone: Oracle Latency
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
A direct comparison of latency performance and architectural trade-offs for high-frequency DeFi applications.
01
Pyth: Ultra-Low Latency for Perps
Sub-second on-chain updates: Leverages a push-based model and Pythnet for aggregation, delivering prices to Solana, Sui, and Aptos in < 400ms. This is critical for perpetual futures DEXs (like Drift, Hyperliquid) and options protocols where stale prices directly cause liquidations.
< 400ms
Solana Update Speed
Push Model
Update Mechanism
02
Pyth: Cost of Speed
Higher gas overhead: The frequent push updates incur consistent on-chain gas costs, paid by the protocol or passed to users. This model is less optimal for high-volume, low-margin operations on high-gas chains like Ethereum L1, where cost efficiency is paramount.
03
RedStone: Optimized for Cost & Flexibility
Pull-based, data-rich feeds: Uses a unique design where signed data is stored off-chain (Arweave) and pulled on-demand via a relayer. This minimizes gas costs to near-zero when idle, ideal for lending protocols (Aave, Morpho), yield aggregators, and cross-chain apps that don't require millisecond updates.
Pull Model
Update Mechanism
1000+ Assets
Feed Coverage
04
RedStone: Latency Trade-off
User-experience latency: The first user to request an update in a block pays the gas and experiences a delay (1-12 seconds depending on chain). This creates a "first mover" cost and is unsuitable for high-frequency trading or real-time liquidation engines that cannot tolerate this variable delay.
ORACLE LATENCY & DATA DELIVERY COMPARISON
Head-to-Head Feature Matrix: Pyth vs RedStone
Direct comparison of latency, architecture, and data delivery models for blockchain oracles.
| Metric | Pyth Network | RedStone |
|---|---|---|
Data Update Latency (Target) | 400 ms | 1-2 seconds |
Primary Data Delivery Model | Push (On-Chain) | Pull (On-Demand) |
On-Chain Data Storage | ||
Free Gasless Data Access | ||
Data Sources per Feed | 80+ | 50+ |
Supported Blockchains | 60+ | 40+ |
Native Token Required |
PYTH VS REDSTONE: ORACLE LATENCY
Latency & Performance Benchmarks
Direct comparison of key performance metrics for on-chain price feeds.
| Metric | Pyth Network | RedStone |
|---|---|---|
On-Chain Update Latency (Median) | < 400 ms | < 2 sec |
Data Sources per Feed | 80+ | 50+ |
Pull Oracle Model | ||
Push Oracle Model | ||
Solana Mainnet Support | ||
EVM Mainnet Support | ||
Sui/Aptos Support | ||
Free Tier Availability |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Pyth vs RedStone: Oracle Latency
Latency is critical for DeFi protocols like perpetuals and options. This breakdown compares the data delivery models of Pyth Network and RedStone.
01
Pyth's Low-Latency Push Model
Direct on-chain push: Pyth publishes price updates directly to its on-chain program via its own validator network, achieving sub-second finality. This matters for high-frequency trading protocols like Drift Protocol and Synthetix that require near real-time price feeds for liquidations and swaps.
< 1 sec
On-Chain Latency
02
RedStone's Pull Model Flexibility
Off-chain data with on-demand verification: RedStone stores signed data off-chain (Arweave) and uses a relayer to push it on-chain only when needed. This reduces gas costs and allows for high-frequency data streams (e.g., 1-second updates) without constant on-chain bloat. Ideal for gas-sensitive L2s and data-intensive applications.
~1-3 sec
End-to-End Latency
03
Pyth's Trade-off: Cost & Throughput
Higher on-chain gas consumption: Every price update is a Solana or EVM transaction, incurring costs. This can be prohibitive for highly granular data (e.g., tick-level) on congested networks. Suits protocols prioritizing absolute data freshness over update cost.
04
RedStone's Trade-off: Relayer Dependency
Introduces a trust assumption: The pull model relies on a relayer to deliver data on-chain when requested. While data is cryptographically signed, liveness depends on the relayer. This adds a component that must be monitored, which matters for fully trust-minimized DeFi primitives.
pros-cons-b
Pyth vs RedStone: Oracle Latency
RedStone: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs for latency-critical applications at a glance.
01
Pyth Strength: Ultra-Low Latency
Sub-second on-chain updates: Pyth's pull oracle model delivers updates in < 400ms on Solana. This matters for high-frequency trading (HFT) protocols, perpetual DEXs like Drift, and options platforms where price staleness directly impacts PnL.
< 400ms
Solana Update Latency
02
Pyth Strength: High-Frequency Data Integrity
First-party publisher data with on-chain attestation: Data from 80+ major exchanges and trading firms is aggregated and cryptographically verified on-chain for every update. This matters for protocols requiring maximum trust-minimization for every tick, such as Synthetix and MarginFi.
03
RedStone Strength: Cost-Efficient Freshness
Gas-optimized data delivery via Data Availability (DA) layers: RedStone pushes signed data to Arweave or other DA layers, with on-chain validation only upon request. This enables 1-minute update frequencies on Ethereum for < $0.01. This matters for cost-sensitive DeFi on L1s (e.g., lending protocols) and applications where sub-minute latency is sufficient.
< $0.01
Cost per Update (Ethereum)
04
RedStone Strength: Modular & Cross-Chain Native
Single source for 1,000+ assets across 50+ chains: The RedStone model is inherently multi-chain. A signed data feed can be relayed to any EVM, Cosmos, or Starknet chain without re-aggregation. This matters for omnichain applications (e.g., LayerZero, Axelar) and teams deploying the same protocol on multiple L2s who want a unified oracle solution.
ORACLE LATENCY COMPARISON
When to Choose Pyth vs RedStone
Pyth for DeFi
Verdict: The default for high-frequency, high-value derivatives and perps. Strengths: Sub-second latency (300-400ms) with on-chain verification via Pythnet. This speed is critical for perpetuals and options on Solana (Drift, Zeta), Aptos, and Sui where liquidations happen in real-time. Data is aggregated from 90+ first-party publishers (Jump Trading, Jane Street) before consensus, ensuring high integrity for multi-million dollar positions. Trade-off: Primarily supports premium assets (crypto, equities, forex). Integration is via native Pyth SDKs, which are less modular than RedStone's.
RedStone for DeFi
Verdict: Optimal for cost-sensitive, multi-chain lending and yield protocols. Strengths: Ultra-low-cost data delivery using Arweave for storage and on-demand fetching via signed data feeds. Latency is higher (~2-5 seconds) but sufficient for most lending rates (AAVE, Compound models) and stablecoin mechanisms. Its EVM-centric design and modular data services (e.g., custom TWAPs) suit composable Ethereum L2s like Arbitrum and Polygon. Trade-off: "Pull" model requires oracle consumers to trigger updates, adding minor complexity versus Pyth's continuous "push."
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Decision Framework
Choosing between Pyth and RedStone for oracle latency is a strategic decision between institutional-grade finality and hyper-optimized speed.
Pyth excels at delivering high-fidelity, low-latency data with robust finality guarantees because it leverages a permissioned network of over 100 first-party publishers and uses a pull-based update model. This architecture, combined with on-chain aggregation via Pythnet, ensures data is verified and attested before being published, resulting in a 1-2 second update latency on Solana and sub-400ms on Pythnet. For example, protocols like Synthetix and Venus rely on this deterministic finality for their high-value perpetual futures and money markets.
RedStone takes a radically different approach by prioritizing ultra-low-latency and cost-efficiency through its push-based, data streaming model and modular design. Data is signed off-chain and delivered in a compact format, with on-chain validation deferred until needed. This results in a trade-off: while updates can be delivered in sub-second latency at a fraction of the gas cost, the final on-chain validation adds a verification step. This is ideal for high-frequency use cases on L2s like Arbitrum or Optimism where speed is paramount.
The key architectural trade-off is between verification-before-publication (Pyth) and publication-before-verification (RedStone). Pyth's model minimizes on-chain trust assumptions at the cost of slightly higher baseline latency. RedStone's model maximizes speed and composability but requires dApps to implement the verification logic, shifting some complexity to the integrator.
Consider Pyth if your priority is maximized security and finality for high-value DeFi primitives—lending, stablecoins, or institutional-grade derivatives—where data integrity is non-negotiable and you operate on a chain like Solana or Sui where its native low latency is fully realized.
Choose RedStone when minimizing latency and gas costs is critical, especially for high-frequency trading, gaming, or prediction markets on EVM L2s. Its modularity and cost structure make it superior for scaling applications that require frequent, cheap updates and can manage the verification pattern.
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