Both are AI gateways. One routes calls. The other governs spend.
Bifrost is excellent at routing LLM calls efficiently across providers with minimal latency. SatGate is built for economic governance — hard budget enforcement, per-tool cost attribution, and monetization. If your agents need to call LLMs fast, use Bifrost. If you need to control what they spend, use SatGate.
| Feature | SatGate | Bifrost |
|---|---|---|
| Hard budget enforcement | ||
| Per-tool cost attribution | ||
| API monetization (L402) | ||
| Fiat billing (Fiat402) | ||
| MCP-aware | ||
| Multi-provider LLM routing | ||
| Automatic LLM failover | ||
| Semantic caching | ||
| General API protection | ||
| Open source | ||
| Enterprise dashboard |
SatGate
Hard enforcement. When budget is exceeded, requests are blocked. No "oops" moments. The CFO knows exactly what will be spent.
Bifrost
Soft limits. Budget tracking with alerts, but requests still go through. You find out what you spent after the fact.
SatGate
Per-tool granularity. See exactly which MCP tool, which agent, which team spent what. Chargeback reports by cost center.
Bifrost
Request-level tracking. You see which requests were made, but no native cost attribution per tool or team.
SatGate
Economic governance. Protect APIs from runaway agent spend. Monetize API access. Control budgets at the request level.
Bifrost
LLM routing. Efficiently route calls across multiple LLM providers. Automatic failover and load balancing. Minimize latency.
Yes. They solve different problems and can be deployed together:
SatGate enforces economic controls. Bifrost optimizes the LLM layer. Different layers, complementary value.
Start with free Observe mode. See what your agents are actually spending.