Who writes this
This site makes judgement calls about products people spend real money on. You should know who is making them, what they have used, and who pays them. Nobody pays them.
Dr. Sanju Abraham
I build and run multi-tenant SaaS products, which is the entire reason this catalogue exists. I am not reviewing LLM gateways from the outside as a journalist or an analyst. I went looking for a comparison that would tell me what a gateway actually costs at volume, whether it would survive a provider outage, and what it would take to leave later — and every comparison I found was either a vendor's own feature table or a blog post that had copied one. So I built the thing I wanted to read.
That background is the reason for the choices that make this site awkward in places. It is why there is a cost estimator that models token markup and credit fees separately instead of quoting a headline price, why every provider page has a portability section, why vendor-published latency numbers are labelled as vendor claims rather than presented as measurements, and why a vendor's security incident is written up on its own page rather than quietly omitted. Those are the things that cost me time in production, so they are the things this site tracks — 113 fields per provider, each one carrying the source it came from.
Independence
No vendor listed on this site has ever paid me, sponsored me, employed me, given me equity, or given me free credits, and none has ever contacted me about coverage. There are no affiliate links, no referral commissions, no sponsored placements, and no paid inclusion. Nothing on this site can be bought — not a listing, not a ranking, not a correction, not a removal.
If that ever changes, it will be written here, on this page, before it affects anything published — and the change will appear in what's changed like any other edit.
What I actually use
Having used a product is expertise, but only if you say so. Having not used one is equally worth saying, because it tells you which verdicts rest on running the thing and which rest on reading its documentation carefully. Of the 20 gateways in the catalogue, I have personally used, paid for, or hold an account with 15.
Used first-hand (15)
Assessed from documentation only (5)
These two lists are generated from the catalogue, not typed out, so a newly added provider appears on the right-hand side automatically until I have actually used it.
What this site is not
- Not a benchmark. Latency and throughput figures are the vendor's own published claims, labelled as such. I have not run a controlled comparison, and you should not treat two vendors' self-reported numbers as comparable with each other.
- Not exhaustive. The catalogue covers 20 gateways and is missing others. Absence is not a judgement.
- Not a substitute for your own pricing check. Pricing changes without notice and some vendors publish conflicting figures across their own pages. Every number here is dated and linked to its source; confirm anything you are about to commit budget to.
- Not neutral about everything. The scoring methodology encodes opinions — that lock-in is a real cost, that an unmaintained project is a risk, that a vendor-measured number is weaker evidence than an independent one. Those opinions are written down so you can disagree with them.
Found something wrong?
Corrections are welcome from anyone, including from vendors writing about their own products, and they are free. The corrections policy explains what to send, what happens next, and how quickly you can expect a reply.