Moralis vs OLI

Name: Moralis vs OLI OpenChainBench measurements
Creator: OpenChainBench
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

OLI leads on the only live benchmark. OLI wins on Best wallet labeling API provider (50.3% vs 44.8%).

Read methodology Last measured Sat, 22 Aug 2026 02:14:56 UTCWindow: rolling 24h1 shared benchmark

Moralis

Multi-chain Web3 data API across EVM chains and Solana. REST endpoints for tokens, NFTs, wallets, balances, and prices.

OLI

Open Labels Initiative, a community standard and shared dataset for EVM address labels. Distributes labels via GitHub and a public API.

Side by side measurements

Best wallet labeling API provider

Aggregators

Moralis

Trails

44.8 %

p99: 44.8%
rank: #5
samples: 1,316

OLI

Leads

50.3 %

p99: 50.3%
rank: #4
samples: 5,579

Per chain

Chain	Moralis	OLI
Ethereum	61.0%	77.8%
BNB Chain	33.0%	13.2%
Base	45.5%	41.3%
Arbitrum	43.5%	47.1%
Polygon	47.3%	41.2%
Optimism	25.1%	53.0%

Coverage means the provider returned a non-empty label for the probed address, it says nothing about label quality or correctness. Read the EOA vs contract split before concluding: a provider can look strong overall while only labeling contracts (verified-source names) and missing every wallet. The Success column is fetch reliability (share of API calls that did not error), not labeling accuracy.

Frequently asked questions

Moralis vs OLI: which one is better?

Moralis and OLI are compared on 1 shared OpenChainBench benchmarks. OLI leads on Best wallet labeling API provider. See the live table on this page for every metric.

Which is more reliable, Moralis or OLI?

On the Best wallet labeling API provider benchmark, OLI leads at 50.3% versus Moralis at 44.8%. Live measurement is updated continuously by the OpenChainBench harness.

How is the Moralis vs OLI comparison measured?

Every benchmark on this page uses the same open methodology, published at https://openchainbench.com/methodology. Data is CC-BY-4.0. Measurement harnesses are MIT-licensed.

How this pair was selected

Auto-generated pairs require: both providers in the same benchmark for seven consecutive days, at least 1000 samples per provider, observable third-party search demand, and a public /products/[slug] page on OCB. Editorially curated pairs (like this one) may publish early when search demand is high and data is accruing — panels with fewer than 100 samples are shown as provisional. The full pair ledger is versioned in the public repo.