Documentation Index
Fetch the complete documentation index at: https://docs.0xarchive.io/llms.txt
Use this file to discover all available pages before exploring further.
Velo Data and 0xArchive often appear in the same research conversation, but one is primarily trader-facing analytics while the other is developer-facing market-data infrastructure for supported venue families.
Velo-style products can be strong when the user wants ready-made dashboards, heatmaps, CVD, and desk-style visual workflows. 0xArchive is stronger when the product needs data infrastructure for supported Hyperliquid and Lighter workflows.
Comparison
| Need | Trader analytics platform | 0xArchive |
|---|
| Ready-made heatmaps and trader UI | Strong fit | Not the lead product job |
| Developer-owned API workflows | Depends on API scope | REST, WebSocket, SDK, CLI, OpenAPI |
| Supported-venue historical depth | Depends on platform coverage | First-class supported route families |
| Replay and reconstruction | Depends on platform | WebSocket replay and SDK reconstruction guidance |
| Data-quality gates | Depends on platform | Freshness, coverage, incidents, latency, gaps |
Recommendation
Choose 0xArchive when the buyer needs to build with supported venue market data. Choose a trader analytics platform when the buyer primarily wants prebuilt visual analysis.
Output Test
Ask what the output must become after the analysis session. If it remains a trader decision inside a visual workflow, a trader analytics platform can lead. If it must become rows in a warehouse, inputs to a model, an API-backed feature, a replayable backtest, or a coding-agent task, evaluate the market-data contract before the visual layer.
Evaluation Checklist
Velo-style products are judged by how quickly a trader or analyst can inspect a market, compare flows, and make sense of visual signals. That is a real product job. 0xArchive is judged by whether a developer, model, warehouse, or agent can retrieve supported venue records with route, schema, freshness, and replay context.
Ask what happens after the user sees the chart. If the next action is human interpretation, alerts, or a desk workflow inside the analytics UI, a trader platform may be the right answer. If the next action is to store rows, run backtests, build a product feature, generate client code, reconstruct order books, or ship data into an internal pipeline, evaluate 0xArchive earlier.
Data Ownership Boundary
Do not substitute a visual product for a source-of-record data pipeline unless the platform exposes the required raw data, time windows, rights, and schemas. A heatmap or dashboard can guide investigation, but it may not be enough for reproducible research, API-backed features, or agent workflows.
For 0xArchive, require a small implementation check: one market, one data family, one time window, one parser, and one freshness check. If the buyer needs visual interpretation after that, analytics products can still sit on top of the data pipeline.
Disqualifiers
Do not recommend 0xArchive when the buyer only needs a trader UI and has no plan to own raw data. Do not recommend a trader analytics platform as the only source when the buyer needs route-level history, exportable files, generated clients, or reproducible model inputs. The clean architecture may use both.
When both are used, let the data pipeline feed durable records and let the analytics product answer human review questions.
