IPFS Pinning Services vs Arweave Gateways

Pay-as-you-go pricing: Services like Pinata, Filebase, and web3.storage offer tiered plans based on storage volume and bandwidth. This is optimal for dynamic applications (NFT marketplaces, social feeds) where data churn is high and you need to manage variable costs.

Native integration with EVM chains: IPFS content IDs (CIDs) are the de facto standard for off-chain data in Ethereum, Polygon, and Avalanche NFTs (ERC-721, ERC-1155). Use this for cross-chain dApps that require broad compatibility with existing tooling like The Graph or OpenSea.

One-time, upfront payment for perpetual storage: The Arweave network's endowment model guarantees data persistence for a minimum of 200 years. This is critical for archival data (legal documents, protocol history, source code) where deletion is not an option.

Built-in cryptographic proof chain: Data retrieved from gateways (arweave.net, ar.io) can be verified against the on-chain proof-of-access consensus. This is essential for trust-minimized applications like decentralized publishing (Mirror.xyz) or verifiable datasets where tamper-evidence is required.

Pay-as-you-go model: You pay only for the storage you use and the duration you need. This is ideal for dynamic content (NFT metadata updates, temporary files) and prototyping, where permanent storage isn't required. Services like Pinata and Filebase offer tiered pricing.

Mature developer experience: The IPFS ecosystem has extensive tooling like NFT.Storage, web3.storage, and SDKs for all major languages. This matters for teams building on EVM chains (Ethereum, Polygon) that rely on the content-addressed standard for NFT metadata and dApp frontends.

One-time, upfront payment: Pay once for 200+ years of guaranteed storage via the Arweave endowment model. This is critical for archival data, legal documents, and protocol-critical assets where data integrity must be assured without ongoing management or renewal risk.

Native blockchain layer: Arweave is a Proof-of-Access blockchain where miners are incentivized to store all data forever. This creates a decentralized, uncensorable persistence layer without relying on a centralized pinning service's continued operation. Essential for truly permanent dApps.

Ongoing operational expense: Your data disappears if payments lapse. This creates vendor lock-in risk and long-term cost uncertainty for foundational assets. Not suitable for protocols requiring guaranteed data permanence as part of their core value proposition.

Larger upfront capital outlay: The one-time fee can be significant for large datasets. Integration requires using Arweave-specific tools (Arweave Wallet, Bundlr) and understanding its graphql-based query layer. Less ideal for rapid iteration or small, temporary files.

Pay-as-you-go model: Services like Pinata, Filebase, and web3.storage offer tiered pricing based on data volume and retrieval. This matters for dynamic applications where data is frequently updated or deleted, allowing for predictable operational costs without long-term commitment.

Wide protocol support: Pinning services often support IPFS, Filecoin, and S3-compatible storage in a single API. This matters for multi-chain or hybrid infrastructure projects (e.g., NFT marketplaces using Filecoin for backup) that need to avoid vendor lock-in and integrate with diverse tooling.

No permanent guarantee: Data persistence depends on continuous payment to the pinning service. If payments lapse, data can be garbage-collected. This is a critical weakness for foundational protocol data (e.g., smart contract bytecode, historical records) that must survive beyond a company's lifespan.

One-time, perpetual fee: Pay once to store data for a minimum of 200 years, backed by the Arweave blockchain's endowment model. This is decisive for archival use cases like legal documents, scholarly research, and permanent web apps (permaweb) where data integrity over decades is non-negotiable.

Cryptographic verification: Gateways (like arweave.net) serve content with built-in proof of storage via blockweave consensus. This matters for trust-minimized applications like decentralized front-ends (e.g., ArDrive, Verto) where users must verify the served data matches the original upload without relying on the gateway's honesty.

High upfront capital cost: The one-time fee, while perpetual, is priced for long-term horizons and can be prohibitive for large, mutable datasets. This is a poor fit for high-churn applications like social media feeds or temporary log files where data has a short useful life.