Which crypto data API covers the most blockchains for token lookups?

CoinGecko currently leads at 461 unique mainnets across the measured providers. The count is read every 6 hours directly from each provider's own asset-registry endpoint (CoinGecko /asset_platforms, CoinPaprika /v1/contracts, CoinStats /wallet/blockchains, Mobula /blockchains) and deduplicated per platform, so the leaderboard reflects what each API actually publishes as queryable for contract-address lookup, not a claim from a marketing page.

Why is this split into two leaderboards (asset-registry vs DEX-indexing)?

Because they answer two different questions. CoinPaprika lists 300+ chains via /v1/contracts because it indexes token metadata on every chain it knows. GeckoTerminal lists ~265 chains via /networks because it actively indexes DEX pools + swap volumes there. Putting them on the same leaderboard makes the number meaningless: a market-data API always wins on chain count while a DEX indexer always wins on pool-level depth. Splitting the bench into asset-registry-coverage (this page) and dex-network-coverage (the sister bench) makes each ranking apples-to-apples.

Does Mobula support more chains than CoinGecko for token lookups?

On this benchmark Mobula returns 81 chains and CoinGecko returns 461 chains. CoinGecko has been building its asset-platforms registry for a decade and covers every chain where a token has ever been listed. Mobula is a younger aggregator focused on breadth-with-quality across EVM, Solana, Bitcoin and non-EVM chains under a single API with an intent-layer wrapping around it. Read the live numbers from the leaderboard, plus the head lag and metadata benches for the depth axes.

Why exclude testnets from the count?

Testnet listings are inconsistent across providers. Some publish every devnet the engineering team ever spun up, others publish none, and a ranking that included testnets would penalise the providers with disciplined network registries. Mainnets are what a builder shipping to production actually integrates against, so the comparison is restricted to mainnets only and filtered server side using each provider's own testnet flag.

Is having more chains always better?

Breadth and depth are independent dimensions. A provider with 200 chains might only index basic metadata on most of them and full historical price + swap history on a dozen. A provider with 60 chains might cover every chain end to end (metadata, prices, pools, holders). Use this benchmark for the token-registry breadth question; the dex-network-coverage bench for DEX-pool breadth; aggregator-head-lag for how fresh the data is on each chain. A serious integration decision reads all three.

How is a mainnet counted?

Any chain a provider lists as a production platform for token lookups, identified by a unique chain id or platform slug. Ethereum, Solana, Base, Arbitrum, BNB, Bitcoin and so on each count once regardless of how the provider labels them internally. Bridged variants of the same token on different chains are not the same chain, the chain id is the deduplication key.

How often does the leaderboard refresh?

Every 6 hours. The harness hits each provider's asset-registry endpoint, parses the response, deduplicates by chain id or platform slug and updates the networks_supported_total{provider} gauge. Failures leave the previous count in place and increment fetch_errors_total, so a temporary outage does not silently drop a provider off the leaderboard.

All answers

AnswerBacked by Crypto data API with most blockchains in asset registry, live coverage ranking

Which crypto data API covers the most blockchains in 2026?

CoinGecko currently leads the asset-registry coverage leaderboard at 461 unique mainnets, measured live every 6 hours from each provider's own registry endpoint across CoinGecko, CoinPaprika, Mobula and CoinStats. DEX-pool coverage is a different question with a separate leaderboard (GeckoTerminal, Codex, DefiLlama, DexPaprika, Sim by Dune).

Data as of 2026-08-02 07:10 UTC, refreshed continuously.

Every onchain product roadmap eventually hits the same gate: which data provider do we integrate so the SDK speaks every chain we need. The honest answer requires two leaderboards, not one, because two very different products get lumped together in the marketing copy. Asset-registry coverage answers the question "on how many chains does this API know tokens for contract-address lookup", that is the number a market-data API cares about (CoinGecko, CoinPaprika, Mobula, CoinStats). DEX-pool coverage answers the question "on how many chains does this API index DEX pools + swap volumes", that is the number a DEX-facing product cares about (GeckoTerminal, Codex, DefiLlama, DexPaprika, Sim by Dune). Comparing a token-registry chain count against a DEX-indexer chain count is not apples-to-apples, and putting both on one leaderboard makes the number meaningless. This page is the asset-registry answer, backed by the OpenChainBench `asset-registry-coverage` bench which polls CoinGecko's `/asset_platforms`, CoinPaprika's `/v1/contracts`, CoinStats's `/wallet/blockchains` and Mobula's `/blockchains` every 6 hours, dedupes per platform, and publishes the count. For the DEX-indexing question read the sister bench `dex-network-coverage`.

Editorial context

Chain coverage is not one number, it is two, and treating them as a single leaderboard is the most common misread of the space. Asset-registry coverage measures how many chains a provider knows tokens on for contract-address lookup, the number a market-data API is optimised for. DEX-pool coverage measures how many chains a provider actively indexes DEX pools and swap events on, the number a DEX-facing product is optimised for. A market-data API can list tokens on 300 chains through a lightweight metadata pipeline while running DEX pool indexing on a dozen; a DEX indexer can cover 200+ chains of pools while carrying only a subset of the token registry. Comparing them on one leaderboard rewards the wrong axis for either product. Beyond the split, breadth is still only one axis. Depth (per-chain freshness, metadata completeness, pool coverage on each listed chain) is independently priced and can grow at the expense of breadth. The right shortlist reads the asset-registry ranking, the DEX-network ranking, the head-lag bench, and the metadata-coverage bench together, not one number in isolation.

Live leaderboard, top 4

Full live data: /benchmarks/asset-registry-coverage, refreshed every minute.

Methodology and data sources

Each provider is polled at its public asset-registry endpoint every 6 hours from a single eu-west origin. CoinGecko reads `/api/v3/asset_platforms` (no auth) which lists every chain CoinGecko can resolve contract addresses on. CoinPaprika reads the public `/v1/contracts` endpoint (no auth) listing platforms supported for contract lookup. CoinStats reads `/wallet/blockchains` with `X-API-KEY`. Mobula reads `/api/1/blockchains` with an Authorization header. Counting is the same shape for every provider: one count per unique chain id or platform slug per response, mainnet only. Failures (network errors, rate limits, auth errors) leave the previous count in place and increment `fetch_errors_total`; the page falls back to its last successful sample so a transient outage does not silently drop a provider off the leaderboard. The companion DEX-indexing leaderboard uses a separate set of endpoints (`/api/v2/networks`, Codex `getNetworks`, `api.llama.fi/chains`, `api.dexpaprika.com/networks`, `sim.dune.com/v1/evm/supported-chains`) and lives on the `dex-network-coverage` bench.

What this number does not tell you

·Asset-registry coverage measures token-lookup breadth, not DEX-pool breadth. A market-data API can know tokens on 300 chains through a metadata pipeline while running DEX pool indexing on only a dozen. Read the `dex-network-coverage` bench for the DEX-indexing view.
·Breadth is one dimension of a data provider's product, not a ranking on quality. A provider with 200 chains and shallow per chain depth can rank above one with 80 chains and full metadata and event coverage on each. Use this benchmark for the breadth question; head lag (`aggregator-head-lag`) and metadata completeness (`metadata-coverage`) answer the depth question.
·Mainnet only. Testnet listings are inconsistent across providers (some list every devnet ever spun up, others list none), and the production count is the one builders integrate against. The harness filters server side using each provider's own testnet flag where available.
·CoinPaprika is counted by platform slugs returned by `/v1/contracts`, which lists platforms supported for contract lookup. CoinPaprika's DEX product (DexPaprika, a separate networks endpoint) is measured on the `dex-network-coverage` bench, not here.
·A provider can technically reach a chain through a custom integration without listing it on the public asset-registry endpoint. This bench measures what each API officially publishes as queryable for token lookups, which is what a builder evaluating the SDK actually sees.

Frequently asked questions

Which crypto data API covers the most blockchains for token lookups?: CoinGecko currently leads at 461 unique mainnets across the measured providers. The count is read every 6 hours directly from each provider's own asset-registry endpoint (CoinGecko `/asset_platforms`, CoinPaprika `/v1/contracts`, CoinStats `/wallet/blockchains`, Mobula `/blockchains`) and deduplicated per platform, so the leaderboard reflects what each API actually publishes as queryable for contract-address lookup, not a claim from a marketing page.
Why is this split into two leaderboards (asset-registry vs DEX-indexing)?: Because they answer two different questions. CoinPaprika lists 300+ chains via `/v1/contracts` because it indexes token metadata on every chain it knows. GeckoTerminal lists ~265 chains via `/networks` because it actively indexes DEX pools + swap volumes there. Putting them on the same leaderboard makes the number meaningless: a market-data API always wins on chain count while a DEX indexer always wins on pool-level depth. Splitting the bench into `asset-registry-coverage` (this page) and `dex-network-coverage` (the sister bench) makes each ranking apples-to-apples.
Does Mobula support more chains than CoinGecko for token lookups?: On this benchmark Mobula returns 81 chains and CoinGecko returns 461 chains. CoinGecko has been building its asset-platforms registry for a decade and covers every chain where a token has ever been listed. Mobula is a younger aggregator focused on breadth-with-quality across EVM, Solana, Bitcoin and non-EVM chains under a single API with an intent-layer wrapping around it. Read the live numbers from the leaderboard, plus the head lag and metadata benches for the depth axes.
Why exclude testnets from the count?: Testnet listings are inconsistent across providers. Some publish every devnet the engineering team ever spun up, others publish none, and a ranking that included testnets would penalise the providers with disciplined network registries. Mainnets are what a builder shipping to production actually integrates against, so the comparison is restricted to mainnets only and filtered server side using each provider's own testnet flag.
Is having more chains always better?: Breadth and depth are independent dimensions. A provider with 200 chains might only index basic metadata on most of them and full historical price + swap history on a dozen. A provider with 60 chains might cover every chain end to end (metadata, prices, pools, holders). Use this benchmark for the token-registry breadth question; the `dex-network-coverage` bench for DEX-pool breadth; `aggregator-head-lag` for how fresh the data is on each chain. A serious integration decision reads all three.
How is a mainnet counted?: Any chain a provider lists as a production platform for token lookups, identified by a unique chain id or platform slug. Ethereum, Solana, Base, Arbitrum, BNB, Bitcoin and so on each count once regardless of how the provider labels them internally. Bridged variants of the same token on different chains are not the same chain, the chain id is the deduplication key.
How often does the leaderboard refresh?: Every 6 hours. The harness hits each provider's asset-registry endpoint, parses the response, deduplicates by chain id or platform slug and updates the `networks_supported_total{provider}` gauge. Failures leave the previous count in place and increment `fetch_errors_total`, so a temporary outage does not silently drop a provider off the leaderboard.