NOWNodes and Alchemy both solve the same core problem — giving your application access to blockchain data without you running a node yourself — but they solve it in different ways. NOWNodes covers 120+ networks under one flat-quota account, while Alchemy focuses on 100+ chains with a deeper application layer built for consumer Web3 products. The right one depends on whether your project needs broad multi-chain reach and predictable billing, or a richer NFT and token API layer for a single ecosystem.
What Are NOWNodes and Alchemy, Exactly?
NOWNodes is a blockchain infrastructure provider that gives developers API-based access to shared and dedicated nodes across 120+ networks, from Bitcoin and Ethereum to Solana, Polygon, and privacy coins like Monero. You get an endpoint and an API key; NOWNodes runs and maintains the actual node behind it.
Alchemy is a Web3 development platform that operates RPC nodes on top of more than 100 chains and layers its own tooling on top — enhanced APIs for NFT and token data, webhooks, and a usage dashboard. Both companies describe themselves as infrastructure, but Alchemy leans harder into being a full developer platform rather than a plain connection to the chain.
RPC (remote procedure call) is the mechanism underneath both services: a way of asking a remote server to run a function — say, “return this address’s balance” — and get the result back over the network. Every blockchain client, from Geth to Solana’s Agave, exposes its data this way, and that shared standard is exactly why providers can be swapped without rewriting an app’s core logic.
Why Do You Need a Provider Like NOWNodes or Alchemy?
Running your own node is a genuine operational job, not a side task. A synced Ethereum full node currently needs roughly 650–700 GB of disk and keeps growing, and it has to be patched and resynced through every protocol upgrade the network ships.
A provider takes that maintenance off your plate. You get an authenticated endpoint, the provider keeps the client software current and the hardware scaled, and your team spends its time on application logic instead of server operations. This is true whether you pick NOWNodes’ flat-rate shared nodes or Alchemy’s compute-unit-billed endpoints — the underlying trade-off is the same.
Here’s why that distinction actually matters day to day: a payment backend doesn’t need to know how Erigon prunes state. It needs eth_getBalance to return the correct number, on every call, without the team babysitting a server at 2 a.m.
Who Actually Uses NOWNodes vs. Alchemy?
NOWNodes tends to attract teams whose product spans several blockchains at once — wallets, exchanges, and payment platforms that need Bitcoin, Ethereum, and a dozen other chains under a single account rather than a separate vendor per network. Trading tools and monitoring systems that lean on WebSocket or gRPC streaming fit the same profile.
Alchemy’s own positioning — and its enhanced NFT and token APIs — points at a narrower kind of team: one building a consumer-facing product where blockchain data becomes a polished screen, not just a backend value.
| Use case | Better fit with NOWNodes | Better fit with Alchemy |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-chain wallet or exchange (BTC + ETH + others) | Yes — one account, one API key | Requires checking non-EVM coverage first |
| NFT marketplace needing metadata indexing | Possible, but you index it yourself | Yes — built-in NFT API |
| Trading bot needing predictable monthly cost | Yes — flat request quota | Depends on method mix and compute units |
| Backend that only checks balances and broadcasts transactions | Yes — lighter, cheaper fit | Works, but pays for unused tooling |
| Consumer dApp with wallet-style UI and token balances | Possible | Yes — token/NFT APIs built in |
A backend that just reads balances and sends transactions rarely touches most of what Alchemy’s API layer offers — and that unused surface area is worth weighing against a plainer, flat-priced endpoint for the same job.
Pricing: Flat Quotas vs. Compute Units
This is where the two providers diverge the most. NOWNodes’ shared plans bill on a flat request-quota model: you pick a monthly tier, get a fixed number of requests, and every call — light or heavy — counts the same against that number.
Alchemy bills by compute unit (CU), a weight assigned to each RPC method based on how much server-side work it takes to answer. A light call like eth_blockNumber costs far less than a heavier one like eth_getLogs, and Alchemy’s own documentation uses roughly 27 CUs as a rough per-request average, though actual usage swings by method, according to Alchemy’s compute unit reference.
| Plan tier | NOWNodes (shared, flat quota) | Alchemy (compute units) |
|---|---|---|
| Free | 100,000 requests/month, 1 API key | 30M CUs/month, 25 RPS, 5 apps |
| Entry paid | ~€20/month, 1M requests, 3 API keys | Pay-as-you-go: $0.525 per 1M CUs, from 300 RPS |
| Mid tier | ~€200/month, 30M requests, 25 API keys | Scales with CU consumption — no flat mid tier |
| Enterprise | ~€500/month, 100M requests, 100 API keys | Custom, from 1,000 RPS |
Pricing and quotas change often on both sides, so treat this table as a snapshot to verify against NOWNodes’ current pricing page and Alchemy’s pricing page before budgeting. The practical difference is predictability: a flat quota means the same 1 million requests cost the same dollar amount whether they’re balance checks or log scans, while a CU bill shifts with whatever methods your app happens to call most that month.
Network and Feature Coverage
NOWNodes advertises support for 120+ blockchain networks, including non-EVM chains like Bitcoin, Dogecoin, Litecoin, and Monero alongside Ethereum, Solana, and other EVM chains. Alchemy lists 100+ chains, which is broad but skews more heavily toward EVM-compatible networks and Solana.
That gap narrows or widens depending on what you’re building. An EVM-only dApp won’t notice much difference in raw chain count. A wallet or exchange that also needs Bitcoin, Litecoin, or a privacy coin will find that several of those simply aren’t part of Alchemy’s lineup, and would need a second provider to fill the gap — something NOWNodes’ node directory covers under one account instead.
Feature-for-feature, both platforms cover the essentials, but the emphasis differs:
- RPC and WebSocket access — both providers support this on their major networks.
- Archive data — both offer it, gated to specific plans and networks.
- Debug and Trace APIs — available on both, for contract-execution analysis.
- Enhanced NFT/token APIs — an Alchemy specialty; NOWNodes doesn’t index this layer for you.
- Market data (prices, market cap, volume) — a NOWNodes product covering 9,000+ cryptocurrencies; not part of Alchemy’s core offering.
- Webhooks — Alchemy’s are general-purpose event webhooks; NOWNodes currently limits its webhook product to Bitcoin and Dogecoin address-balance changes, so check the specific event type you need before assuming coverage.
Switching Costs: How Locked In Are You?
Because JSON-RPC is a standardized protocol, moving core RPC traffic between providers is usually a configuration change, not a rewrite. Auston Bunsen, co-founder of QuickNode, described the dynamic plainly in an interview with Sacra: “I can go from Alchemy to Infura to QuickNode relatively quickly, unless I’m using one of their sort of custom APIs.”
That caveat is the whole story. An app built purely against eth_getBalance and eth_sendRawTransaction can point at a new endpoint with a URL and key change. An app that leans on Alchemy’s getNftsForOwner or its webhook event schema has real migration work to do if it ever needs to leave — because those calls don’t exist the same way anywhere else.
That’s worth weighing upfront rather than after you’re six months into production. A team that expects to stay EVM-only and wants the enhanced tooling accepts that lock-in deliberately. A team that wants to keep its options open, or that already knows it needs non-EVM chains, has less to untangle later by starting on a flatter, standards-first provider.
Which One Should You Choose?
Is NOWNodes better than Alchemy for a multi-chain product? Generally, yes — one account covering 120+ networks, including non-EVM chains, under a flat request quota is a simpler and more predictable setup than running Alchemy plus a second provider to fill chain gaps.
Is Alchemy better than NOWNodes for a consumer NFT or wallet app? For that specific case, Alchemy’s built-in NFT and token APIs save real indexing work — provided the app stays within Alchemy’s supported chains and the team accepts compute-unit billing.
The honest framing is that these are two different bets. NOWNodes bets on breadth and pricing predictability being worth more than a bundled application layer. Alchemy bets that its tooling saves more engineering time than its narrower chain list and variable billing cost. Map your actual method mix and chain list against both before picking — a short staging test against each endpoint answers the question faster than any pricing page.
Limitations Worth Knowing Before You Commit
Alchemy’s compute-unit model rewards light, simple calls and penalizes heavier ones — an indexing job leaning on eth_getLogs or debug_traceTransaction can burn through a monthly allowance far faster than the headline CU number suggests. Budgeting for it means modeling your actual method mix, not the cheapest example on a pricing page.
NOWNodes’ flat quota removes that guesswork but comes with its own ceiling: once you exceed a plan’s request allowance, you either upgrade or pay per-100k overage rates, regardless of whether those extra requests were cheap or expensive to serve. And its webhook product, as noted above, doesn’t yet cover the kind of general-purpose event streaming Alchemy offers.
Neither company is a universal answer. A provider that fits a consumer NFT marketplace poorly may be exactly right for a Bitcoin-and-Ethereum payment backend, and the reverse holds just as often.
Conclusion
Alchemy and NOWNodes both give you API access to blockchain nodes, but they’re built for different bets: Alchemy bundles NFT and token tooling on top of RPC access for consumer-facing apps willing to accept compute-unit billing, while NOWNodes prioritizes broad multi-chain coverage — including non-EVM networks — under flat, predictable pricing. For a team building across several chains at once, or one that wants to know its bill before the month starts, NOWNodes’ model is the more straightforward fit. For a team shipping a single-ecosystem consumer product that would otherwise build its own NFT indexing layer, Alchemy’s bundled tooling is worth its cost. Since standard JSON-RPC calls migrate between providers with little more than a URL change, testing both against your real traffic for a week is cheaper than guessing.
FAQ
Is NOWNodes cheaper than Alchemy?
It depends on your method mix. NOWNodes’ flat request quotas make costs predictable regardless of which methods you call, while Alchemy’s compute-unit pricing can cost less for light workloads but climb quickly for calls like eth_getLogs or debug_traceTransaction.
Does Alchemy support Bitcoin?
No. Alchemy’s 100+ chains skew toward EVM-compatible networks and Solana; it doesn’t cover Bitcoin, Litecoin, or privacy coins like Monero the way a broader multi-chain provider such as NOWNodes does.
Can I use NOWNodes and Alchemy at the same time?
Yes. Running two RPC providers side by side — one as primary, one as failover, or split by chain — is a common production pattern that limits how much a single provider’s outage or rate-limit spike can affect your app.
Do I need Alchemy’s NFT API, or can I build that myself?
If you’re only checking balances and broadcasting transactions, you likely don’t need it. If your product displays NFT ownership, metadata, or token holdings as a core feature, building that indexing layer yourself is real engineering time that Alchemy’s API replaces.
How hard is it to migrate off Alchemy later?
Standard RPC calls migrate easily since JSON-RPC is a shared protocol across providers. The friction comes from Alchemy-specific APIs — NFT endpoints, webhooks, and enhanced methods — which don’t have direct equivalents elsewhere and need to be rebuilt against whatever you migrate to.
