Toolbox
RPCs
Subgraphs
Load Balancer
Contributor
Providers
EAS
ToolboxRPCsSubgraphsLoad BalancerContributorProvidersEASOthers

Compare ChainSafe vs Rubic Bridges providers

This page compares ChainSafe and Rubic across Bridges provider data, including plan type, API type, chain, pricing, technology, available APIs, limitations, security features, monitoring, regions, and documentation links where available.

Compared providers: ChainSafe, Rubic.

6 providers and 6 plans to compare
6
Offer
Chain
Technology
TX Speed SLA
Throughput SLA
Open Source
Support
Available APIs
Monitoring & Analytics
Additional Features
Asset Types
Price
Economical Security
Economical Security Note
Audits Performed
Decentralization
SDK
Supported Chains
Tags
Minimize Sidebar
ChainSafe
ChainSafe Systems
testnet
Substrate-Based Bridge
Yes
Discord, Telegram
REST, SDK
Partial – dev dashboards
Filecoin ↔ Substrate chains (experimental)
FIL, wFIL
Yes
Semi-decentralized
Rust, JavaScript
Polkadot Substrate-based chains, potentially Filecoin
GitHub
Rubic
mainnet
Bridge Aggregator
Yes
Discord
Bridge API, Swap API
15k+ tokens, 100+ chains supported
ETH, ERC‑20
Depends on underlying bridge
Yes
JS SDK, Web UI
polygon, bnb chain, tron, unichain, bitcoin, solana, base, arbitrum, ethereum, linea, optimism, zksync era, ton, avalanche, berachain, blast, scroll, morph, fraxtal, soneium, mode, mantle, metis, manta pacific, fantom, zkevm, pulsechain, taiko, hemi, filecoin, x layer, bahamut, dash, monero, cardano, cosmos, litecoin, xrp ledger, aptos, polkadot, stellar, near, zilliqa, tezos, xdc, kava cosmos, neo, gnosis, flare
BridgeDocs
chain.love

chain.love

LinkedInXTelegramGitHub
DocumentationWhitepaper

©2024-2026 CHAIN.LOVE