Figment excels at developer-centric infrastructure and staking-as-a-service for a curated set of high-quality protocols. Its strength lies in deep protocol integration, offering proprietary data products like Hubble for on-chain analytics and a strong focus on restaking via EigenLayer. For example, Figment's institutional staking platform supports over 40+ proof-of-stake networks with a claimed 99.9%+ validator uptime, catering to funds requiring reliable yield generation and MEV (Maximal Extractable Value) optimization strategies.
LABS
Comparisons
Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking & AVS Infrastructure
A technical comparison of two leading enterprise-grade staking and AVS infrastructure providers, analyzing service levels, geographic distribution, and support for emerging restaking protocols.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: The Battle for Institutional Blockchain Infrastructure
A data-driven comparison of Figment and Blockdaemon for enterprise-grade staking and AVS (Actively Validated Services) operations.
Blockdaemon takes a different approach by providing broad, enterprise-grade node infrastructure and a unified management layer. This results in a trade-off between specialization and scale. Blockdaemon's key advantage is its massive node footprint—managing over 25,000 nodes across 70+ blockchains—and its Ubiquity platform, which offers a single API and dashboard for deploying nodes, validators, and monitoring across diverse environments like AWS, Azure, and private data centers, ideal for large institutions managing complex, multi-chain deployments.
The key trade-off: If your priority is deep integration, restaking strategies, and data analytics for a focused portfolio, choose Figment. If you prioritize operational scale, geographic redundancy, and a unified management plane for a vast array of blockchain protocols, choose Blockdaemon.
tldr-summary
FIGMENT vs BLOCKDAEMON
TL;DR: Key Differentiators at a Glance
A data-driven breakdown of institutional staking and AVS infrastructure providers to inform your technical and strategic decision.
01
Figment's Edge: Multi-Chain Specialization
Deep protocol expertise across 50+ networks including Ethereum, Solana, Cosmos, and Polkadot. This matters for institutions building cross-chain strategies or requiring bespoke validator configurations for niche L1s. Their DataHub API suite provides unified access to node infrastructure, simplifying development.
02
Figment's Trade-off: Focus Over Breadth
Primarily a staking and data services pure-play. While excellent for delegation and node APIs, they are not a one-stop-shop for all enterprise blockchain needs (e.g., core custody, exchange connectivity). Choose Figment when staking and reliable data feeds are your primary, isolated requirements.
03
Blockdaemon's Edge: Enterprise-Grade Suite
Full-stack institutional platform offering staking, node management, institutional-grade custody partnerships, and monitoring under one roof. Their Ubiquity dashboard provides a single pane of glass for multi-chain operations. This matters for large organizations needing consolidated governance, security, and reporting.
04
Blockdaemon's Trade-off: Complexity & Cost
The comprehensive platform can introduce higher complexity and cost versus point solutions. Best suited for enterprises with dedicated blockchain ops teams and larger budgets (>$500K). May be overkill for protocols focused solely on maximizing staking yield or accessing basic RPC endpoints.
05
Choose Figment For:
- Protocols & DAOs seeking maximized staking yields with deep chain-specific knowledge.
- Developers needing reliable, multi-chain RPC and indexer APIs via DataHub.
- Teams with existing custody solutions (e.g., Fireblocks, Copper) looking to plug in a best-in-class staking layer.
06
Choose Blockdaemon For:
- TradFi Institutions (banks, asset managers) requiring a turnkey, compliant platform with integrated custody.
- Enterprises running complex, multi-chain node infrastructures needing centralized monitoring and governance.
- Projects building on EigenLayer AVSs leveraging their early and robust operator infrastructure.
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking & AVS Infrastructure
Direct comparison of key metrics and features for institutional-grade blockchain infrastructure providers.
| Metric | Figment | Blockdaemon |
|---|---|---|
Institutional Staking AUM | $10B+ | $20B+ |
Supported Proof-of-Stake Networks | 70+ | 100+ |
AVS (Actively Validated Services) Support | ||
Slashing Insurance Coverage | ||
Average Node Uptime SLA |
|
|
Dedicated Node Deployment | ||
Multi-Cloud Infrastructure | AWS, GCP | AWS, GCP, Azure |
Native Restaking via EigenLayer |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS ANALYSIS
Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking & AVS Infrastructure
A data-driven comparison of two leading institutional-grade infrastructure providers, focusing on their core strengths and trade-offs for staking and Actively Validated Services (AVS) deployment.
02
Figment's Con: Narrower Enterprise Suite
Focus on Core Staking & APIs: While excellent for staking and developer data, Figment's broader enterprise tooling (e.g., dedicated private cloud, extensive compliance reporting dashboards) is less comprehensive than specialized competitors. This matters for large institutions requiring turnkey, bank-grade custody integrations and custom SLAs for every service line.
04
Blockdaemon's Con: Potential for Less Specialization
Jack-of-All-Trades Trade-off: Supporting a vast array of protocols can mean less depth in niche chains or cutting-edge staking economies. This matters for protocols with unique governance or slashing parameters (e.g., Cosmos interchain security, Solana MEV) where deep, protocol-native expertise is critical to maximize rewards and minimize risk.
pros-cons-b
PROS AND CONS
Figment vs Blockdaemon: Institutional Staking & AVS Infrastructure
Key strengths and trade-offs for CTOs evaluating enterprise-grade node infrastructure and EigenLayer AVS support.
01
Blockdaemon's Institutional Scale
Operates 40,000+ nodes across 70+ networks, providing unmatched global redundancy and capacity. This matters for large asset managers and exchanges requiring multi-chain staking at scale with a single SLA.
40,000+
Nodes
70+
Networks
04
Figment's Staking Governance Focus
Provides institutional-grade governance participation and reporting, including vote delegation and detailed analytics. This matters for Treasury departments and DAOs that must demonstrate active stewardship and voting participation on networks like Cosmos and Ethereum.
99.9%
Uptime SLA
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
Decision Framework: When to Choose Which Provider
Figment for Institutions
Verdict: The premier choice for regulated entities and large-scale asset managers. Strengths: Unmatched focus on institutional-grade security and compliance. Offers dedicated, isolated infrastructure (single-tenant nodes), SOC 2 Type II certification, and comprehensive insurance coverage. Their DataHub API suite provides reliable, SLA-backed access to over 50 networks including Ethereum, Solana, and Cosmos, crucial for risk-averse treasury operations. Governance participation tools and detailed reporting are first-class. Considerations: Premium pricing reflects the enterprise service level. May be overkill for smaller, agile teams.
Blockdaemon for Institutions
Verdict: A robust, scalable alternative with a strong focus on blockchain-agnostic infrastructure and AVS operations. Strengths: Powerful for institutions building across a fragmented multi-chain landscape. Their Ubiquity platform offers a unified dashboard for node management, staking, and, critically, Actively Validated Services (AVS) like EigenLayer, enabling new revenue streams. Strong partnerships with AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud provide flexible deployment. Excellent for institutions with a hands-on engineering team. Considerations: While secure, the compliance narrative is slightly less pronounced than Figment's. Best for institutions comfortable with a platform model.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Strategic Recommendation
A data-driven conclusion for CTOs choosing between Figment and Blockdaemon for institutional-grade staking and AVS infrastructure.
Figment excels at providing a curated, high-touch service for large-scale validators and protocols requiring deep technical integration. Their Hubble Stack for Ethereum, which includes MEV-boost relay integration and comprehensive slashing protection, is a benchmark for institutional security. For example, their 99.9%+ validator uptime across 40+ Proof-of-Stake networks and their role as a core infrastructure provider for protocols like The Graph and Livepeer demonstrate their focus on reliability and bespoke support for complex deployments.
Blockdaemon takes a different approach by offering a massively scalable, API-first platform designed for enterprises managing thousands of nodes across multiple clouds and regions. This results in a trade-off: while potentially less personalized, their Universal Blockchain API and Node-API provide a unified interface for staking, data queries, and AVS operations (like EigenLayer) across 100+ networks. Their acquisition of Gemini's staking business and management of over $10B in staked assets underscore their capacity for handling enormous, diversified institutional portfolios.
The key trade-off: If your priority is deep protocol integration, white-glove support for novel AVS architectures, and maximizing validator rewards through advanced MEV strategies, choose Figment. If you prioritize global scale, multi-cloud node orchestration, and a unified API to manage a vast, heterogeneous portfolio of assets and services, choose Blockdaemon. For most institutional CTOs, the decision hinges on whether bespoke engineering or scalable automation is the primary constraint for their web3 infrastructure strategy.
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
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