← Back home · Compare
StreamSync vs Triton One
Validator-adjacent Geyser streams
Triton One sells the Solana firehose. We sell answers. Different layers; sometimes complementary.
| Feature | StreamSync | Triton One | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstraction level | Query (SQL + RPC) | Raw Geyser stream | Comparable |
| Latency SLA | Sub-10ms query response | Sub-ms stream delivery | Triton One |
| Build-on cost | Low — answers come back ready | High — you build the indexer | StreamSync |
| Failover | Multi-operator racing | Multi-region validators (single vendor) | StreamSync |
| Pricing | Per-query market | Dedicated stream subscription | Comparable |
| Right for HFT | Good for query-shaped HFT | Best for stream-shaped HFT | Triton One |
| Right for analytics | Native DuckDB SQL | Build your own | StreamSync |
| Compliance | Protocol-level, no single party | Single-counterparty contracts | Triton One |
Pick StreamSync when
- ▸You want answers to queries, not a raw stream you process yourself
- ▸You need per-query pricing rather than dedicated-stream subscriptions
- ▸Your team is small and you cannot run a full Geyser ingest pipeline
- ▸Latency SLA is more useful to you than maximal data depth
Pick Triton One when
- ▸You are doing MEV or HFT and want the lowest-level access available
- ▸You already operate validators and want a clean upstream
- ▸You need account-level updates streamed before any indexing layer
Still deciding?
Most production teams use more than one provider. Try StreamSync behind a feature flag for the queries where latency matters most and keep Triton One for everything else.