ChainPick

Covalent (GoldRush) vs SubQuery (2026)

A head-to-head comparison of Covalent (GoldRush) and SubQuery — pricing, the features that actually differ, and which one fits which use case.

At a glance

C

Covalent (GoldRush)

Unified multi-chain data API with the broadest chain coverage

4.2(132)
Starting price
$50/mo
Free plan
Yes
Best for
Broadest multi-chain coverage (100+ networks)
Full Covalent (GoldRush) review →
S

SubQuery

Decentralized indexer combining data, RPC, and AI across EVM and non-EVM

4.2(96)
Starting price
$49/mo
Free plan
Yes
Best for
Combines indexing, RPC, and AI in one ecosystem
Full SubQuery review →

Where Covalent (GoldRush) and SubQuery differ

These are the 6 capabilities where the two tools genuinely diverge — the rest of their feature sets overlap.

CapabilityCovalent (GoldRush)SubQuery
Query LanguageREST APIGraphQL
Custom SubgraphsNoYes
Real Time IndexingNoYes
Open SourceNoYes
Streaming DataYesNo
Self HostableNoYes

Full feature comparison

FeatureCovalent (GoldRush)SubQuery
Query LanguageREST APIGraphQL
Decentralized
Multi Chain
Custom Subgraphs
Real Time Indexing
Historical Data
Open Source
Streaming Data
Governance Token
Self Hostable

Pricing compared

SubQuery has the lower entry price of the two.

Covalent (GoldRush)

Covalent (GoldRush)

Free (dev tier)

Free

  • Unified API, 100+ chains
  • Decoded on-chain data
  • Balances, tx, NFT data
  • Getting-started limits
Get Started
Popular

Covalent (GoldRush)

Growth

$50/mo

$500/yr billed annually

  • Higher limits
  • More endpoints
  • Priority access
Get Started

Covalent (GoldRush)

Enterprise

Custom

  • Custom SLA
  • High volume
  • Dedicated support
Contact Sales

SubQuery

SubQuery

Free (dev tier)

Free

  • Open-source SDK
  • EVM + non-EVM chains
  • Managed hosted tier
  • GraphQL APIs
Get Started
Popular

SubQuery

Growth

$49/mo

$490/yr billed annually

  • Higher limits
  • Decentralized network
  • Token cost offsets
Get Started

SubQuery

Enterprise

Custom

  • Custom deployment
  • SLA
  • Dedicated support
Contact Sales

Which should you choose?

Choose Covalent (GoldRush) if…

  • Broadest multi-chain coverage (100+ networks)
  • Decoded, normalized data via one API
  • No custom indexers to build or maintain

Watch out: Less flexible than custom indexers.

Choose SubQuery if…

  • Combines indexing, RPC, and AI in one ecosystem
  • Strong Polkadot/Substrate and Cosmos support
  • Decentralized network with token incentives

Watch out: Broad ecosystem — clarify which service you need.

Our verdict

Covalent (GoldRush) edges ahead on our editorial score (4.2/5), but these tools aren’t straight substitutes. Pick Covalent (GoldRush) when broadest multi-chain coverage (100+ networks) matters most to your workflow; pick SubQuery when combines indexing, rpc, and ai in one ecosystem is the priority. The deciding factor is usually the trade-off you can least afford — Covalent (GoldRush) means accepting that less flexible than custom indexers, while SubQuery means broad ecosystem — clarify which service you need.

Frequently asked questions

Is Covalent (GoldRush) or SubQuery better?

Covalent (GoldRush) carries the higher editorial rating (4.2/5 vs 4.2/5), but they solve different problems. Covalent (GoldRush) is the stronger pick when you need broadest multi-chain coverage (100+ networks). SubQuery wins when combines indexing, rpc, and ai in one ecosystem.

Which is cheaper, Covalent (GoldRush) or SubQuery?

SubQuery starts lower, at $49/month versus $50/month. Both also offer a free tier.

What are the main drawbacks of Covalent (GoldRush) and SubQuery?

Covalent (GoldRush)'s main limitation is that less flexible than custom indexers. For SubQuery, broad ecosystem — clarify which service you need. Weigh these against how you actually plan to use the tool.

Can you use Covalent (GoldRush) and SubQuery together?

In most cases yes — many teams run both, using each where it's strongest. Since Covalent (GoldRush) leads on broadest multi-chain coverage (100+ networks) and SubQuery on combines indexing, rpc, and ai in one ecosystem, the two are often complementary rather than mutually exclusive.