diff --git a/answers/helius-vs-triton-vs-quicknode-solana.yml b/answers/helius-vs-triton-vs-quicknode-solana.yml deleted file mode 100644 index 00f3c17f..00000000 --- a/answers/helius-vs-triton-vs-quicknode-solana.yml +++ /dev/null @@ -1,41 +0,0 @@ -slug: helius-vs-triton-vs-quicknode-solana -question: "Helius vs Triton vs QuickNode, which lands the most Solana transactions?" -short_answer: | - OpenChainBench broadcasts identical Solana transfers through Helius, Triton and QuickNode every measurement cycle from three regions and confirms inclusion onchain, so the landed-rate head-to-head is measured live rather than self-reported. Jito bundle submission is also on the leaderboard as a separate priority-lane comparator. Full 24h landed-rate ranking for the three named providers is at openchainbench.com/benchmarks/solana-tx-landing. - -benchmark: solana-tx-landing - -intro: | - Every Solana app that touches user transactions asks the same question the moment congestion spikes: which RPC provider actually lands transactions and which one silently drops them into the void. Provider blog posts advertise self-reported landed-rate figures with no third-party probe, and public dashboards conflate confirmed with landed by treating any getSignatureStatuses response as success. This page answers the head-to-head developers actually search for: on the same transaction, sent through the same broadcast path, into the same current mempool state, which of Helius, Triton and QuickNode gets it included. OpenChainBench signs and broadcasts real base-fee transfers through each provider every measurement cycle, waits a bounded window for onchain confirmation, and publishes the landed rate, median slot delta, and per-provider failure taxonomy live. - -methodology: | - Every cycle the harness signs an identical SOL transfer from a probe keypair, broadcasts it in parallel through each provider's mainnet RPC using sendTransaction, and polls getSignatureStatuses until it either sees the signature in a confirmed block or crosses a landing deadline. Landed rate is confirmed-in-window / broadcast-total per provider over a rolling 24h window. Slot delta is the median number of slots between broadcast and inclusion on landed attempts only. Providers whose broadcast returns a network error before submission are excluded from the landed-rate denominator and counted separately in the fetch_errors_total counter so a network flake never masquerades as a landing failure. Regional coverage uses the same three Railway replicas (us-east, eu-west, sgp) so the same providers compete from the same geographies. - -limitations: - - "Small-value probe. Every broadcast is a minimal SOL transfer with base fee only. Providers running priority-lane routing (Helius Sender, QuickNode Bundler) may show a wider gap on real user traffic than on base-fee probes because their advantage kicks in on paying transactions." - - "One tx type. The harness tests base transfer; complex programs (Jupiter aggregated swaps, Kamino borrow flows) exercise different simulation and preflight paths per provider. The base-transfer landing rate is a floor, not a ceiling." - - "Regional footprint matters. A provider terminating close to a Solana leader schedule lands faster on that leader; the per-region breakdown surfaces which provider wins from which region rather than hiding the geography effect in a cross-region average." - - "Landing deadline is bounded. Transactions that do not land inside the window count as not landed even if they eventually confirm minutes later. The window is publicly documented and matches the deadline a typical user or wallet times out on." - -faq: - - q: "Which Solana RPC lands the most transactions right now, Helius, Triton or QuickNode?" - a: "The live 24h ranking for the three named providers is on openchainbench.com/benchmarks/solana-tx-landing. Each cycle the harness broadcasts an identical SOL transfer through Helius, Triton and QuickNode from three regions and polls the signature onchain until it is confirmed or crosses the landing deadline, so the ranking is reproducible from public data rather than derived from provider self-reports. Jito bundle submission is included on the same leaderboard as a separate priority-lane comparator, which is why an aggregate leader may name Jito rather than one of the three RPC providers in the question." - - q: "Why measure landing rate instead of just latency?" - a: "On Solana under congestion, the failure mode that matters to users is dropped transactions, not slow responses. A provider can return a fast success ack from sendTransaction and never actually get the tx into a block. OpenChainBench confirms inclusion onchain by polling for the signature, so the landed rate reflects what a user actually experiences, not what the provider self-reports." - - q: "Is Helius Sender factored into this ranking?" - a: "The base bench measures the standard sendTransaction path. Helius Sender is a priority-lane product that competes against QuickNode Bundler and Jito bundle submission on paying transactions with tips. Sibling benches on the same harness cover the priority-lane comparison; the head-to-head on this page is the base-tier landing rate that developers on free or standard plans hit by default." - - q: "Are the numbers different from the self-reported vendor dashboards?" - a: "Yes and they should be. Vendors report their own success from their own retry logic, sometimes counting a preflight-passed tx as successful before it actually confirms. OpenChainBench uses the onchain signature as ground truth: if a slot did not contain the signature inside the deadline, it did not land, regardless of what the provider's dashboard reports." - - q: "How often is the leaderboard refreshed?" - a: "Every measurement cycle the harness re-broadcasts fresh probes, waits for confirmation, and publishes the landing metrics to Prometheus. The bench page reads a 24h rolling window so intraday congestion spikes smooth out; longer-term shifts in provider performance show up within hours." - - q: "Does public RPC still work for Solana in 2026?" - a: "Only in the sense that it accepts your broadcast. The landed rate on unpaid public endpoints under 2026 congestion is materially below every keyed provider on this leaderboard. Public RPC is fine for read paths and development; production tx submission needs a keyed provider whose landed rate is on this page, not a marketing claim." - -related: - - which-solana-rpc-lands-the-most-transactions - - which-solana-dex-aggregator-is-the-fastest - - which-crypto-price-api-is-the-fastest - -seo_title: "Helius vs Triton vs QuickNode Solana landing rate 2026" -seo_description: "Helius, Triton and QuickNode Solana landed-rate head-to-head measured live onchain from three regions. Live 24h ranking at openchainbench.com/benchmarks/solana-tx-landing." -status: live diff --git a/benchmarks/evm-block-builders.yml b/benchmarks/evm-block-builders.yml index 3a1366fc..191dd777 100644 --- a/benchmarks/evm-block-builders.yml +++ b/benchmarks/evm-block-builders.yml @@ -13,7 +13,7 @@ unit: pct higher_is_better: true disclaimer: | - Attribution relies on the extraData tag each builder voluntarily stamps into its blocks. A builder can change or strip its tag at any time; unrecognized tags land in the Other row and every raw string is logged so the table grows. The Vanilla row (locally built blocks) could be marginally overstated if a builder deliberately uses a client-default tag to avoid attribution — the relay cross-check is the independent signal that surfaces this divergence. High share is a centralization datapoint, not a quality ranking. + Attribution relies on the extraData tag each builder voluntarily stamps. A builder can change or strip its tag; unrecognized tags land in Other and raw strings are logged so the table grows. The Vanilla row (locally built) could be marginally overstated if a builder uses a client-default tag; the relay cross-check surfaces this. High share is a centralization datapoint, not a quality ranking. seo_intro: | Who actually builds Ethereum? Since MEV-Boost, validators outsource @@ -207,8 +207,8 @@ providers: - slug: vanilla name: Vanilla - tag: Locally built by the proposer — or a builder who blanked/faked a client-default tag (rare; relay cross-check surfaces divergence) - formula: "Blocks with empty or execution-client default extraData (geth, reth, nethermind, besu, erigon), meaning the proposer built locally, as a percentage of all blocks observed in 24h. Could be marginally overstated if a builder fakes a client-default tag; the relay cross-check is the independent verification signal." + tag: Locally built by the proposer, or a builder who blanked/faked a client-default tag (rare; relay cross-check surfaces divergence) + formula: "Blocks with empty or client-default extraData (geth, reth, nethermind, besu, erigon), meaning the proposer built locally, as a percent of all 24h blocks. Marginally overstated if a builder fakes a client tag; relay cross-check verifies." queries: p50: 100 * sum(increase(ebb_blocks_total{builder="vanilla"}[24h])) / scalar(sum(increase(ebb_blocks_total[24h]))) p90: 100 * sum(increase(ebb_blocks_total{builder="vanilla"}[24h])) / scalar(sum(increase(ebb_blocks_total[24h]))) diff --git a/benchmarks/nft-collection-metadata.yml b/benchmarks/nft-collection-metadata.yml index f2cc7f31..f0311d97 100644 --- a/benchmarks/nft-collection-metadata.yml +++ b/benchmarks/nft-collection-metadata.yml @@ -66,7 +66,7 @@ findings: - "external_url is the field most likely to differ between providers: OpenSea and Moralis surface the collection's website on most blue-chips, Alchemy's `openSeaMetadata.externalUrl` is structurally null on the same set. p99 ({{p99:moralis}} / {{p99:alchemy}} / {{p99:opensea}}) is what a portfolio tracker sees during the worst 6h window in the day." - "{{worst_name}} trails at {{worst_p50}} (p50, 24 h). A 20-point gap on this leaderboard means roughly one in five field renders falls back to a placeholder when displaying a blue-chip collection." -source: https://github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/nft-collection-metadata +source: https://github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/nft-metadata-coverage prometheus: window: 24h diff --git a/benchmarks/pm-api-latency.yml b/benchmarks/pm-api-latency.yml index f333d30f..b7452b9e 100644 --- a/benchmarks/pm-api-latency.yml +++ b/benchmarks/pm-api-latency.yml @@ -105,7 +105,7 @@ per_chain_explainer: h2: Predexon API latency body: "Predexon is a multi-venue aggregator that unifies Polymarket, Kalshi and Limitless behind one schema. Its API answers at {{p50:predexon}} p50 (24h, all regions), measured on the same market-price endpoint the harness probes on the native venues, so the direct comparison of a unified aggregator against three venue-native APIs is head to head. Predexon aggregates upstream data; a Predexon latency higher than the sum of its three underliers is the cost of unification. Lower is the value of having one contract instead of three." -source: https://github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/pm-api-latency +source: https://github.com/ChainBench/OpenChainBench/tree/main/harnesses/pm-rate-limits prometheus: window: 24h diff --git a/benchmarks/rwa-yield-accuracy.yml b/benchmarks/rwa-yield-accuracy.yml index ed57f37a..e65a9f76 100644 --- a/benchmarks/rwa-yield-accuracy.yml +++ b/benchmarks/rwa-yield-accuracy.yml @@ -20,7 +20,7 @@ higher_is_better: true seo_intro: | Every tokenized U.S. Treasury on the market publishes an APY. - Ondo USDY, Superstate USTB, Ondo OUSG, Maple SyrupUSDC — each + Ondo USDY, Superstate USTB, Ondo OUSG, Maple SyrupUSDC, each advertises a yield on its public dashboard. This page measures what they actually pay their token holders on-chain, using each issuer's own distribution mechanism (daily rebase, monthly USDC dividend, diff --git a/benchmarks/validator-yield.yml b/benchmarks/validator-yield.yml index 75d593e6..bd8ad69a 100644 --- a/benchmarks/validator-yield.yml +++ b/benchmarks/validator-yield.yml @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ methodology: - "MEV treatment. Solana: MEV tips from Jito are already folded into Stakewiz `total_apy`. `ocb_validator_mev_share_bps` is exposed for transparency (a reader sees 'Helius APR 600 bps of which 80 bps MEV') but NOT subtracted to produce a 'staking-only' figure. Hyperliquid: no separate MEV layer (centralised sequencer captures order-flow value at the protocol level), so the MEV gauge is 0 by convention." - "Ethereum. Source: `GET ultrasound.money/api/v2/fees/effective-balance-sum` (free, no key), live total beacon-chain effective balance. APR = 64 × epochs_per_year / sqrt(total_gwei), the consensus spec reward formula at 100% participation (realized ~99.5%, under 2 bps of drift). One network-average series: consensus rewards are uniform per 32 ETH increment, so the average equals the solo validator nominal APR. Execution tips and MEV excluded. Price: CoinGecko (ETH/USD)." - "Jailed / inactive handling. Hyperliquid: `jailed=1` validators (currently 4) land in the dataset with `predictedApr=0`, so `net_yield_bps=0`. Solana: ~42 validators report `total_apy=0`. Live data shows two causes: commission 100% (operator routes everything to themselves, delegators get 0) or zero leader slots this epoch (no block-production rewards). Both legitimate transient states, both count toward total + median." - - "Excluded by design. Per-validator Ethereum gauges (~1M active indices; needs beacon-node ingestion, deferred to v2). Ethereum execution tips and MEV (needs per-relay MEV-Boost scraping; the published figure is consensus only). Lido / Rocket Pool / Coinbase staked-ETH are products with own fee structures, not validator yields (separate bench `liquid-staking-yield`, future). Polkadot not yet active (requires separate source ingestion, deferred to v2). Cosmos Hub, Avalanche, Cardano and Sui now tracked in v1." + - "Excluded by design. Per-validator Ethereum gauges (~1M indices; beacon-node ingestion, v2). Ethereum execution tips + MEV (per-relay MEV-Boost scraping needed; published figure is consensus only). Lido/RocketPool/Coinbase are products with fees, not validator yields (separate bench). Polkadot v2. Cosmos Hub, Avalanche, Cardano, Sui now tracked." findings: - "{{best_name}} currently leads at {{best_p50}} (median net yield, 24 h) across {{count}} measured chains. The cross-chain gap is structural: Solana's ~5.6% median reflects PoS inflation + Jito MEV tips minus average ~24% validator commission, while Hyperliquid's ~2.2% reflects staking-only rewards on a deflationary HYPE token with no MEV layer to top it up." diff --git a/src/lib/removed-benches.ts b/src/lib/removed-benches.ts index 02b3aa4c..3444883d 100644 --- a/src/lib/removed-benches.ts +++ b/src/lib/removed-benches.ts @@ -48,6 +48,13 @@ export const RENAMED_BENCH_SLUGS: Record = { export const REMOVED_ANSWER_SLUGS = new Set([ "which-evm-aggregator-has-the-fastest-quote", "which-solana-rpc-lands-the-most-transactions", + // References rpc-keyed-latency (bench 069, staging-only, in + // REMOVED_BENCH_SLUGS below). Prod was returning 404 on this answer + // page because the underlying bench 410s. Answer stays on staging. + "alchemy-vs-quicknode-vs-infura-latency", + // References solana-dex-quote-latency (staging-only, in + // REMOVED_BENCH_SLUGS). Same pattern. + "which-solana-dex-aggregator-is-the-fastest", ]); export const REMOVED_BENCH_SLUGS = new Set([