Arweave excels at permanent, immutable data storage because it uses a novel blockweave structure and an endowment model to guarantee one-time payment for perpetual storage. For example, its network currently secures over 3.6 petabytes of data with a single, upfront fee, making it the go-to choice for permanent archives like the Open Web Sandbox or NFT metadata for protocols like Solana. Its consensus mechanism, Proof of Access, incentivizes miners to store the entire dataset, ensuring high data redundancy.
LABS
Comparisons
Arweave vs Skynet: Permanent Blockchain vs Decentralized CDN
A technical analysis comparing Arweave's immutable, permanent data layer with Skynet's decentralized content delivery network. We break down architecture, cost models, performance, and ideal use cases for engineering leaders.
Chainscore © 2026
introduction
THE ANALYSIS
Introduction: Two Visions for Decentralized Data
Arweave and Skynet represent fundamentally different architectural philosophies for storing and serving data on decentralized networks.
Skynet (now the Skynet Labs SDK for Sia) takes a different approach by functioning as a high-performance decentralized CDN and file-sharing layer. This results in a trade-off: data is stored on a renewable, 90-day contract basis on the Sia network, prioritizing low-cost, high-speed retrieval over permanence. Its architecture is optimized for serving web apps and streaming media with sub-100ms latency, powering applications like SkyFeed and decentralized video hosting.
The key trade-off: If your priority is guaranteed, permanent archival for legal documents, historical records, or foundational protocol data, choose Arweave. If you prioritize low-cost, high-throughput content delivery for dynamic web applications, user-generated content, or media streaming, choose the Skynet SDK. The former is a permanent ledger; the latter is a decentralized cloud utility.
tldr-summary
Arweave vs. Skynet
TL;DR: Core Differentiators
Key architectural strengths and trade-offs for permanent data storage vs. decentralized content delivery.
01
Arweave: True Data Permanence
One-time fee for perpetual storage: Pay ~$5-10 to store 1GB forever via the endowment model. This is critical for NFT metadata, legal documents, and scientific archives where data integrity for decades is non-negotiable. Uses a Proof-of-Access consensus to guarantee data replication.
~$5-10/GB
Lifetime Cost
200+ Years
Guarantee Model
02
Arweave: Rich Ecosystem & Smart Contracts
Fully programmable layer-1 with SmartWeave: Enables decentralized applications (dApps) with on-chain data, like ArDrive and everFinance. Supports Atomic NFTs where the asset and its metadata are stored together permanently. Ideal for creating self-sustaining, serverless backends.
1000+
Permaweb dApps
03
Skynet: High-Performance CDN
Sub-second global content delivery: Built as a decentralized CDN on the Sia network, optimized for speed and low latency. Perfect for serving website frontends, streaming video, and user-generated content platforms that require fast, scalable retrieval.
< 100ms
Typical Latency
04
Skynet: Developer-Friendly & Portable Data
Skylinks and MySky for user-owned data: Data is referenced via immutable Skylinks, while MySky provides a portable, user-controlled identity and data store across apps. Excellent for social apps, decentralized blogging (SkyFeed), and projects prioritizing user data sovereignty and interoperability.
05
Arweave Trade-off: Retrieval Speed & Cost
Not optimized for real-time streaming: Retrieval can be slower and more expensive for high-bandwidth applications compared to a CDN. The economic model prioritizes permanence over speed. Less ideal for frequently changing, large-scale media delivery.
06
Skynet Trade-off: Storage Guarantees
Renewable contracts, not permanent storage: Data is stored via 6-month renewable contracts on Sia. Requires active maintenance (automatic or manual) and payment to prevent deletion. A better fit for dynamic web content than immutable historical records.
6 Months
Contract Duration
HEAD-TO-HEAD COMPARISON
Arweave vs Skynet: Permanent Blockchain vs Decentralized CDN
Direct comparison of core architecture, economics, and use cases for decentralized storage solutions.
| Metric / Feature | Arweave | Skynet |
|---|---|---|
Primary Architecture | Permanent Data Blockchain | Decentralized CDN & Portal Network |
Data Persistence Model | One-time, perpetual payment | Pay-as-you-go, renewable storage |
Storage Cost (per GB, est.) | $5-10 (one-time, permanent) | $2-4 per month (recurring) |
Data Retrieval Speed | ~2-5 seconds (depends on miners) | < 1 second (edge-cached) |
Smart Contract Support | true (via SmartWeave) | |
Native Token | AR | SIAP (for portals), uses Sia for storage |
Ideal Use Case | NFT metadata, permanent archives, dApp backends | Web hosting, media streaming, mutable app data |
pros-cons-a
PROS AND CONS
Arweave vs Skynet: Permanent Blockchain vs Decentralized CDN
Key architectural and economic trade-offs for permanent data storage versus high-performance content delivery.
01
Arweave's Core Strength: True Permanence
One-time, upfront payment for permanent storage via the endowment model. Data is cryptographically guaranteed to be stored for a minimum of 200 years. This is ideal for NFT metadata, legal documents, and protocol archives where data integrity and immutability are non-negotiable.
200+ years
Guarantee
02
Arweave's Trade-off: Cost & Speed for Static Data
Higher initial cost for permanent storage. Data retrieval speeds are slower compared to a CDN, as nodes must reconstruct data from the weave. Not optimized for high-frequency updates or streaming media. Best suited for write-once, read-many use cases.
~2-5 sec
Typical Fetch Time
03
Skynet's Core Strength: High-Performance CDN
Pay-as-you-go, S3-like pricing for decentralized storage and delivery. Built as a global edge network for fast content retrieval. Perfect for hosting web apps, streaming video, and dynamic content that requires low-latency access worldwide.
< 100ms
Edge Latency
04
Skynet's Trade-off: Economic Impermanence
Data persistence requires ongoing payments (via Siacoin). If payments lapse, data can be pruned after a grace period. This creates operational overhead for long-term archival. Better for active, accessed data rather than permanent legal records.
90-day
Default Grace Period
pros-cons-b
Arweave vs Skynet
Skynet: Pros and Cons
Key strengths and trade-offs at a glance for permanent blockchain storage vs. decentralized CDN.
01
Arweave's Core Strength
Truly permanent data storage: Pay once, store forever via the endowment model. This is critical for NFT metadata, legal documents, and protocol archives where data integrity for decades is non-negotiable. Projects like Solana NFT collections and Mirror.xyz rely on this guarantee.
02
Arweave's Trade-off
Higher upfront cost and complexity: Storing 1GB costs ~$8-12 upfront versus pennies for temporary cloud storage. Integration requires understanding Arweave's wallet system and Bundlers (like Irys). Not ideal for high-volume, ephemeral data like social media images.
03
Skynet's Core Strength
High-performance decentralized CDN: Sub-second retrieval for files via Skylinks. Perfect for hosting decentralized frontends (dApps), streaming content, and user-generated media where low-latency global access is paramount. Used by projects like Fileverse and SkyFeed.
04
Skynet's Trade-off
Not permanent storage: Files are stored on a renewable 90-day contract basis by hosts. Long-term persistence isn't guaranteed by the protocol itself, making it a weaker fit for permanent records or value-bearing digital assets that require Arweave's endowment model.
CHOOSE YOUR PRIORITY
When to Choose: A Decision Framework
Arweave for Permanent Storage
Verdict: The definitive choice for truly permanent, on-chain data. Strengths: Arweave's blockweave structure and endowment model guarantee one-time payment for indefinite storage, verified by the network. This is ideal for legal documents, source code archives, and historical records where data integrity and immutability are non-negotiable. Protocols like Kyve use it for permanent data lakes, and Mirror.xyz uses it for immutable publishing. Key Metric: 200+ years of guaranteed archival for a single upfront fee.
Skynet for Permanent Storage
Verdict: Not designed for true permanence; better for durable, long-term hosting. Strengths: Skynet offers long-term, renewable storage via its decentralized CDN. While data can persist as long as portals are paid, it lacks Arweave's cryptoeconomic guarantee of permanence. It's suitable for application frontends, media libraries, or datasets where you need durability but can manage renewals. Key Limitation: Data persistence is contingent on portal operators and renewals, not a one-time endowment.
verdict
THE ANALYSIS
Final Verdict and Recommendation
Choosing between Arweave and Skynet is a fundamental decision between permanent data storage and high-performance decentralized content delivery.
Arweave excels at providing permanent, immutable data storage because of its unique endowment-based economic model and blockweave structure. For example, a single, one-time payment of approximately $0.02 per MB guarantees storage for a minimum of 200 years, making it ideal for archiving critical data like NFT metadata, smart contract history, and scientific datasets. Its ecosystem, including tools like Bundlr and standards like ANS-110, is optimized for long-term data permanence.
Skynet (now the Skynet SDK for decentralized apps) takes a different approach by focusing on high-performance, mutable content delivery. This results in a trade-off: data is stored for a minimum of 90 days by default (renewable) rather than permanently, but it offers sub-second latency and global CDN-like performance. Its architecture is built for serving dynamic web apps, streaming video via SkyFeed, and user-controlled data portals, prioritizing speed and usability over indefinite archival.
The key trade-off: If your priority is permanent, uncensorable data persistence for archival or foundational Web3 layers, choose Arweave. If you prioritize low-latency, scalable content delivery for decentralized applications and user-facing media, choose the Skynet SDK. For a complete stack, many projects use both: anchoring permanent proofs on Arweave while serving mutable frontends and user data through Skynet.
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