Chainstack Reviews

My main use case for Chainstack is building Web3 security and wallets for banks, exchanges, and personal projects. Chainstack provides the API for us to access blockchain networks, which is exactly what we need.

A specific example of how Chainstack fits into one of our projects is that we write applications that need to access endpoints. We grab the endpoint in Chainstack, post it in our application, specify the API key in the environment variable, and that is basically all that is required.

Regarding my main use case with Chainstack, I find that it is very reliable and supports many chains, which is really useful for me. The main weakness is that they are usually not fast in adopting new chains. They might be late by a day, a week, or sometimes two weeks in comparison to competitors, but they are cheap and reliable.

Chainstack has positively impacted my organization, and I have noticed that the cost is good. We are saving five to ten times compared to Alchemy that we were using previously at the beginning because it is the most popular. Alchemy might be slightly more reliable, but it is very expensive, and the performance was not great all the time. Chainstack is much cheaper and has that same performance.

The best features that Chainstack offers for me are reliability and latency. They greatly increased latency not long ago for some of the chains. Chainstack has many chains with good latency, and that is basically the main offering.

The impact of Chainstack on my daily work and my team's workflow is that while it is not helping us deliver the product faster, low latency means we can react to events on the network faster or scan more blocks in the blockchains. Latency is very important in Web3 and whenever you work with a blockchain. Multi-chain support is essential because if you are doing exchanges, you need access to multiple chains to do multiple operations on multiple chains at the same time.

For Chainstack to be improved, they can start adopting chains faster, which I would appreciate tremendously. They can react to incidents faster and be more transparent in the console. They have a status page that I need to monitor independently, and whenever I go into the UI or console, I do not really see any incidents. They could add more transparency here.

Documentation is absolutely perfect, and support is top-notch. I have never had any issues with support. They are active in Telegram and Discord and support tickets. Whatever communication method I feel comfortable with, I can discuss issues and someone will help me. It is very convenient. The main area for improvement is transparency regarding whenever there is an issue on a deployed node or any lack thereof. The UI is not really helpful in seeing those issues, so I need to go to the status page. If they increase transparency, it will be much better.

I have been using Chainstack for a year and a half.

Chainstack is stable in my experience.

Chainstack's scalability for my needs is adequate. They provide me the endpoint, and they can scale up and down whenever I send more or fewer requests, so it is very convenient. In case I need to deploy a new node, I can do so in a second or two.

The customer support for Chainstack is amazing and fantastic. They reply to tickets and in Telegram and Discord within minutes. They are always polite and always trying to help and keep the communication professional. They understand that in Telegram and Discord you can allow yourself a smile or a joke. However, in emails, they communicate extremely professionally.

I previously used Alchemy before Chainstack. I switched because they are very expensive and because Chainstack now has better latency.

I have seen a return on investment. I am saving five to ten times the cost in comparison to Alchemy, which was much more expensive.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing shows that pricing is one of the main reasons I am using Chainstack. There is no license; there is just a subscription on their platform. I am using the Growth plan, and it works well for me.

Before choosing Chainstack, I evaluated other options. I mainly considered three players: Alchemy, QuickNode, and Chainstack. I was using Alchemy at the beginning and then switched to Chainstack as the second-best alternative.

I rate Chainstack an eight out of ten.

I rate it an eight because they can support new protocols faster, which is one point of improvement, and they can add more transparency to the platform and align it with their status page, which is another point.

Chainstack's governance and security are adequate. I use AI extensively because everyone is currently using AI. Chainstack has an MCP, and I use it. I do not have any security concerns, so that is fine.

Regarding Chainstack's AI capabilities, I think the accuracy and reliability of output are adequate. Chainstack provides me with an endpoint to use in my applications. Whenever I use MCP, API, or UI to deploy the endpoint, the output is pretty much the same and adequate. It is just how it should be.

Chainstack is not deployed on our side because Chainstack is a SaaS cloud platform. We just grab the endpoint from them, and they host it somewhere. As for where we host our application, that is a different matter. We host our applications on AWS, but that does not matter in this case because it has nothing to do with Chainstack. We grab the endpoint from Chainstack; that is all that is required.

Regarding which cloud provider Chainstack uses to host my endpoints, it is possible to specify the region where I want my endpoint to be hosted. However, I am using Elastic Nodes from Chainstack, and they provide me with the endpoint closest to me that has the best latency.

My advice to others looking into using Chainstack is to use Chainstack if it is good for you in terms of latency and pricing. In case you want enterprise pricing, go to a different provider.

I rate Chainstack an eight overall.

My main use case for Chainstack is monitoring USDC transfers on Base protocol, which is a finance/trading-related use case. In my finance trading context, we are monitoring USDC transfers on Base and matching them to payment records, utilizing Chainstack to retrieve transfer events, receipts, and block information. Our application handles confirmation rules and reconciliation, so the RPC integration with Chainstack has a clearly defined role.

The best features that Chainstack offers include awesome latency, as it has the lowest latency we have encountered among other competitors, and great support, as they were fast and responsive, answering developer-specific questions very quickly.

The low latency and support from Chainstack immensely impacted our work, as they were the only ones among competitors and other RPC providers to really guide us through the initial setup and make everything work for us, which helped us tremendously to set up everything.

We also utilize Chainstack's Solana Geyser plugin to obtain a constant data stream from Solana, and it worked well for us, proving to be pretty consistent in performance and really reliable from our perspective and experience with Chainstack.

Chainstack positively impacts our organization by keeping us up and running, as it is a crucial part of our infrastructure that works reliably and consistently.

If I had to pick one area where Chainstack could get even better, I would say they were decent all-around, and we are completely satisfied with the performance, support, interactions, and the price, as they are the all-around best option we ever considered.

I have been using Chainstack for about six months.

Chainstack is stable, and it has been consistent, showing 100% consistency all-around.

Chainstack's scalability is impressive as we can run an indefinite amount of nodes on our plan; I would say it scales easily and infinitely.

The customer support from Chainstack is awesome, as I have mentioned throughout my answers, with the support being the best, first-class, and making us feel important, even though we are not a large customer. I would rate the customer support as a 10 out of 10.

We previously used QuickNode, but we were burning through our included quota extremely fast, finding it significantly more expensive for our use case, with performance in line with what Chainstack gives us. They were also decent, but the price was insane, as Chainstack is two to three times cheaper than other solutions.

Since using Chainstack, I have noticed specific outcomes or metrics, such as having 100% consistency with our processes, 100% landing grades, and 0% errors overall.

We have one software engineer managing the fleet of nodes we run with Chainstack. If we ever wanted to use a DIY node setup or any other approach to running blockchain infrastructure, it would take us 5x more employees to run it, manage it, and keep an eye on it.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate Chainstack overall as a 10 because they are a great tool and great software, being a solid and decent RPC provider.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was positive as the website was clear, we paid what we initially thought we would pay, and the pricing is great, being on the cheaper tier of the competitors, even though the performance is decent, making it the best bang for the buck.

Before choosing Chainstack, we evaluated options including Alchemy, another RPC provider, and our shortlist consisted of Chainstack, QuickNode, and Alchemy. With similar performance from all of them, Chainstack was the cheapest and had the fastest support responses, making it the all-around obvious choice for us.

My advice to others looking into using Chainstack is simple: just use Chainstack, and consider using others as a fallback, but we never looked back after switching to Chainstack as our main RPC provider. They are overall awesome, and I would recommend Chainstack 10 out of 10 to everyone I know in the industry. I have rated this review overall as a 10 out of 10.

We primarily use Chainstack as game developers for blockchain integrations in our games, mainly for issuing prizes, keeping track of transactions, and related activities.

I mainly use Chainstack for issuing prizes and buying in-game currencies and in-game items, along with everything surrounding these functions.

We primarily use dedicated nodes on Chainstack because we need a custom setup for our requirements. The dedicated node product, which provides our own private blockchain node that is not shared in any way, is what we are using.

Having dedicated nodes is crucial for our team because the performance would be similar to cloud nodes or global nodes, but we need custom settings on our client's side. Since it is not a regular deployment and we need to make custom changes, we purchase a dedicated node.

Chainstack has positively impacted our organization as it is the only practical way for us to connect to the blockchain. The alternative would be running our own node, and with current hardware prices, that would be prohibitively expensive. Additionally, we would need to hire someone with blockchain expertise to manage it, which is not feasible for us.

From our approximations, we spend approximately seven to eight times more money on running nodes internally, so the cost multiplier would be around seven times.

Chainstack could be improved as it sometimes has a confusing user interface. However, we do not use the UI at all, as we run everything through agents, specifically AI agents, and we primarily use MCP.

We still need to purchase a plan to get access to dedicated nodes. If we could purchase only dedicated nodes without a subscription requirement, that would be ideal.

I have been using Chainstack for a couple of years.

Regarding Chainstack's governance and security, I think they are quite secure based on what I can see on their website, and we have never had any concerns.

Regarding Chainstack's accuracy and reliability of output, I think they are excellent because their MCP worked great for us with no issues of any sort.

My advice for others looking into using Chainstack is to explore their dedicated nodes because there are no published prices for other providers such as QuickNode or Alchemy. We needed to contact their sales teams for quotes, and Chainstack was the most affordable option overall.

I would rate Chainstack an eight out of ten. I chose eight out of ten because of the requirement to purchase a subscription plan in addition to buying a dedicated node. If we could pay for only the dedicated node and abandon the subscription completely, that would be better.

I rate this review eight out of ten overall.