What are the best Runlayer alternatives in 2026?
Nolan Sullivan
Published · Updated · 12 min read
Runlayer is a security-first Model Context Protocol (MCP) gateway with an endpoint agent. It authenticates, scans, and logs every tool call an AI agent makes. This roundup covers five alternatives that handle similar tasks with different strengths. Some add deeper security controls, some operate via a different architecture, some pair MCP governance with an LLM gateway, and some govern any agent without per-framework integration.
Below, we explain what Runlayer is, why teams look for alternatives, and how five tools compare: Speakeasy, Mintive (formerly MintMCP), Kong, LiteLLM, and Willow.
NOTE
We build Speakeasy, which appears in this roundup, so read us as an interested party. Claims about other vendors link to their public documentation or to comparisons we have already published, and we say so where a vendor's documentation leaves a question open.
What is Runlayer?
Runlayer is an AI control plane built around an MCP gateway and an endpoint agent. Every MCP request passes through a single-tenant AWS gateway, hosted by Runlayer or in your own account, that authenticates, authorizes, scans, and logs it. People authenticate through SSO and SCIM. Agents authenticate as Agent Accounts, OAuth 2.0 clients created inside Runlayer with no matching record in Okta or Entra.
Why do teams look for Runlayer alternatives?
Runlayer fits a security organization that wants layered ML detection on MCP traffic and reach into laptops and browsers. Teams evaluate alternatives for four reasons:
-
A deeper security focus. Agent identity that resolves in Okta or Entra rather than inside the vendor, sensitive-data detection beyond Runlayer's built-in PII types, detection rules you can write and replay against real sessions before enforcing them, enforcement on Linux endpoints (AI Watch detects there but does not enforce), and ISO 27001, which Runlayer does not list.
-
A different architecture. Runlayer is closed source, anchored to single-tenant AWS, and custom servers are packaged as containers and deployed to vendor-managed infrastructure. Teams that want open source, GCP or Azure, servers generated from their API contracts, or an extension of the API gateway they already run need a different shape.
-
An LLM gateway alongside MCP governance. Runlayer's LLM Gateway is in early access and available only as self-hosted, so model routing, failover, semantic caching, and spend controls aren't included in the managed offering.
-
An agent-agnostic solution. Sessions and AgentGuard require agent-specific SDKs for four frameworks; teams that configure native connectors directly skip the gateway. Teams with custom agents or mixed runtimes need governance at the MCP protocol layer, where agent identity resolves to their identity provider regardless of runtime.
Which Runlayer alternative fits your MCP gateway needs?
Each alternative fits one of three architectures: infrastructure, governance, or a hybrid that also supplies the servers. For a deeper breakdown, see MCP gateway architectures.
Runlayer alternatives at a glance
Note: This matrix shows key differentiators. For hosting details (AWS vs. multi-cloud), identity resolution, and security controls depth, see the individual vendor sections.
Speakeasy: AI control plane and MCP gateway alternative
Speakeasy is the alternative when the evaluation widens from "secure the MCP servers we have" to "govern every AI surface and supply the tools our agents need." The MCP gateway is one part of an AI Control Plane that connects AI clients to tools, secures every interaction, controls who reaches what, and observes usage and cost across the organization.
Identity maps to your directory. People sync from Okta or Entra through directory sync. Agent Identity, in early access, syncs from providers such as Entra Agent ID or is created in Speakeasy. One permission model covers both: identity always resolves to your provider, not to vendor-native accounts. Permissions are based on how tools are classified in their MCP definitions, so a support role can read from the billing server and be denied on a refund with no change to the server. A deny-override rule always takes precedence.
Security controls are authored and tested. MCP server review gathers an evidence dossier on every server and requires a written rationale for approval. Risk policies run a prompt injection heuristic with an opt-in LLM judge. The detector catalog covers secrets, financial data, PII, government identifiers across the US, UK, EU, and APAC, and healthcare identifiers, applied across prompts, assistant messages, tool calls, and tool responses. Natural-language guardrails replay against recent live sessions to produce a scorecard before they enforce. Custom detection rules in CEL are tested against real sessions.
Enforcement reaches MCP clients through standard OAuth 2.1 authorization at the gateway. Agent hooks integrate with Claude Code, Claude Cowork, Cursor, Codex, and OpenCode. A device agent covers macOS, Windows, and Linux. A LiteLLM integration extends controls to model traffic. Custom MCP servers are generated from the API contracts your teams already maintain and hosted under the same governance. Costs, budgets, and Agent Sessions key on directory attributes. Speakeasy holds SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001 certifications.
Mintive: managed MCP gateway as Runlayer alternative
Mintive is the alternative that keeps Runlayer's shape: a governance MCP gateway paired with an endpoint product, sold to security-led buyers. Its managed hosted connectors remove connector operations. Employees reach a self-serve MCP store after SSO, and Agent Monitor hooks coding agents on laptops, including GitHub Copilot CLI. Its trust center lists SOC 2 Type 2 and HIPAA. Organizations using Okta get Cross App Access.
Mintive mirrors Runlayer's trade-offs in three ways. Agent identities are native to Mintive with no matching directory record. Custom servers are written and hosted as Docker images rather than generated from a contract. The most expressive policy layer is customer-authored JavaScript middleware. ISO 27001 is not listed.
If you are weighing the two managed governance gateways, Speakeasy vs Mintive covers the comparison in depth.
Kong: MCP gateway with API management integration
Kong approaches the problem from API management. For enterprises already running Kong, it is the alternative that adds no second gateway. Its AI gateway extends the platform they use for API traffic to model traffic, routing requests across LLM providers through one API with semantic caching, prompt guards, and token-based rate limiting. The Kong MCP Registry, in Tech Preview inside Kong Konnect, pairs a server catalog with the AI gateway for runtime enforcement.
The appeal is consolidation: one vendor for API traffic, model traffic, and MCP traffic, with familiar operations. Kong's MCP support is in preview, and API management platforms have historically been weaker at access control than at routing. Coming from a Runlayer evaluation, carefully test the tool-level access control, threat detection, and audit capabilities against your requirements before adopting Kong for MCP governance.
LiteLLM: open-source API gateway with MCP access control
LiteLLM is the alternative that starts from model traffic. It is already the front door for that traffic in many organizations: one open-source proxy exposing an OpenAI-compatible API across more than 100 providers, with retries, fallbacks, virtual keys, and per-key and per-team budgets. Its MCP gateway extends the proxy to tool traffic.
MCP servers are added in the UI or in config.yaml over HTTP, SSE, or stdio, with OAuth 2.0 to upstream servers in both PKCE and client-credentials flows. Access is controlled by key, team, and organization. Tool calls are logged, and spend is tracked per MCP server.
On the model path, a guardrails framework runs providers such as Presidio, Lakera, Bedrock, and Azure Content Safety before, during, or after the call. A Generic Guardrail API lets you plug in your own control plane, which is the hook the Speakeasy LiteLLM integration uses. It self-hosts anywhere, including air-gapped. Its enterprise page lists SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001, with SSO, SCIM, and audit logs in the paid tier.
As a Runlayer alternative, the key difference is the governance model. Every decision uses a LiteLLM virtual key rather than directory identity. There is no endpoint agent or browser layer, and no scanning of tool definitions or session trajectories. LiteLLM fits teams that want tool access to ride the proxy they already operate, with detection layered on through guardrail hooks.
Willow: an MCP governance gateway with a self-serve connector marketplace
Willow is the alternative that most closely matches Runlayer's endpoint-plus-browser reach while lifting the AWS constraint. It wraps its gateway in self-serve enablement: a marketplace with 1,000+ pre-built connectors, endpoint sensors that surface unapproved tools and shadow MCP servers, and a Chrome extension for browser policy enforcement. Every gateway call passes identity, group-based access, and request and response guard checks, per its documentation. It deploys as SaaS, self-hosted on AWS, GCP, or Azure, or air-gapped, and reports SOC 2 Type II.
The identity model is the main difference: the gateway mints and validates its own tokens matched to Willow user records, with SSO upstream, rather than evaluating a directory principal at call time. SCIM and guardrails are enterprise-gated per its pricing. See Speakeasy vs Willow for the detailed comparison.
What is Runlayer?
Why do teams look for Runlayer alternatives?
What are the best Runlayer alternatives?
Is Speakeasy a Runlayer alternative?
Runlayer vs Speakeasy: what is the main difference?
Which Runlayer alternative includes an LLM gateway?
Which Runlayer alternatives can run outside AWS?
Questions about this roundup, or think we've got something wrong? Talk to our team.
Last updated on