I have read that many Solana mechanisms are stake-weighted and I was wondering what would be the implications of this when using services such as Helius or Quicknode vs a self-hosted (non staked) solution.

For instance, everything else being equal, would an RPC node hosted by Helius or Quicknode receive transactions with a lower average delay than a self-hosted RPC node as a result of those companies having their own staked validators?

Or similarly, everything else being equal, would an RPC node hosted by Helius/Quicknode be more likely to land transactions than a self-hosted one?

1 Answer 1


In scenarios where the network is uncongested, the advantage of using high-stake validators diminishes. This is because the network has sufficient capacity to process transactions quickly across the board, regardless of the stake weight behind them.

  • That makes sense - in moments of congestion then is it right to assume that there will be a better quality of service both for reduced latency and increased likelihood of transactions landing when using a staked service?
    – Jesuspc
    Commented Apr 23 at 17:49
  • @Jesuspc During peak times or when the network faces congestion, Quality of Service (QoS) mechanisms that prioritize transactions from higher-staked nodes become highly significant. Transactions routed through RPC nodes associated with or operated by high-stake validators are more likely to be picked up and confirmed faster compared to those with less or no stake backing Commented Apr 23 at 18:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.