Skip to content

Providers

Compare RPC providers on measured data

The top 4 on the chosen chain are compared by default. Pick your own — up to 4 — and the selection moves into the URL, so a comparison can be sent to someone else and they will see exactly what you saw.

Not sure who to compare?Start from who leads, then compareThe ranked answer per chain, with the figures that produced it.

Providers on Solana

Side by side

30d window · 30.0 days observed · generated 2026-10-08 18:28:09 UTC

Selected providers compared across every measured metric
MetricPublicNodeTatumSolana Foundation
Rank123
Score92.683.469.9
StatusExcellentGoodDegraded
Availability99.19%99.22%99.84%
p50 latency22.8 ms26.6 ms15.9 ms
p95 latency50.8 ms88.5 ms258.2 ms
p99 latency231.4 ms239.1 ms941.9 ms
Correctness99.25%99.30%100.00%
Head lag9.52 blocks8.10 blocks0.03 blocks
Rate limited049,8790
Unsupported2,30902,254
Samples1,325,890440,6101,009,333

3 providers scored against each other. A cohort this small makes every rank a comparison between very few alternatives: first of 3 is a weaker claim than the same score on a crowded chain, and the score is relative to whoever is here.

Where the gap comes from

Two scores side by side say one is higher. This says why: the score is a weighted sum, so it comes apart, and each component’s share of the difference adds back to the difference exactly. Compared against PublicNode, the highest scorer of those selected.

PublicNodevsTatum

+9.1points

  • Latency+9.8
  • Head freshness−0.6
  • Availability−0.0
  • Correctness−0.0

The parts add to +9.1, exactly — the score is a weighted sum, so it comes apart.

PublicNodevsSolana Foundation

+22.7points

  • Latency+30.0
  • Head freshness−6.9
  • Availability−0.3
  • Correctness−0.2

The parts add to +22.7, exactly — the score is a weighted sum, so it comes apart.

Latency over time