Comparison

LiteLLM vs Keybrake

LiteLLM and Keybrake both call themselves "proxies for AI workloads". They govern different halves of what an autonomous agent does. Here's the head-to-head.

Quick verdict

Side by side

LiteLLMKeybrake
CategoryLLM gateway / proxySaaS-API governance proxy
Vendors governedOpenAI, Anthropic, Google, 100+ LLMsStripe, Twilio, Resend (+ roadmap)
Virtual / vault keysVirtual keys, per-key budgetsVault keys, per-vendor policy bundles
Spend cap unitUSD/day/key (inferred from tokens)USD/day/vendor/key (parsed from vendor response)
Endpoint allowlistModel allowlistEndpoint + parameter-level allowlist (e.g. /v1/charges allowed, /v1/payouts blocked)
Scope beyond endpointModel, organisationStripe customer-ID allowlist, Connect account allowlist, merchant-of-record scope
Mid-run revokeYes — flip key to blocked; next request 401sYes — flip vault_key to revoked; median next-request 401 < 5s
Audit log shapePrompt / completion / tokens in / tokens out / cost / latencyVendor / endpoint / request-params / vendor-parsed-cost / policy-result / latency
Pricing modelOSS self-host free; cloud starts ~$50/moFree (1k req/mo, 1 vendor); Team $99/mo (100k req, all vendors); Scale custom
Best forAI-ops engineers managing LLM spend across teamsOps-risk engineers worried about a runaway agent burning real dollars

Where the comparison falls apart (in a good way)

LiteLLM cannot read a Stripe response

LiteLLM's cost accounting is a table of model-name → cost-per-token. Stripe doesn't expose tokens; it returns a charge object with amount and fee fields. To cap Stripe spend correctly you need a proxy that parses vendor responses — which is a categorically different piece of code. Keybrake ships vendor-specific parsers (Stripe's amount, Twilio's price, Resend's flat $0.0004/email). LiteLLM does not, and adding them would be a different product.

Keybrake cannot speak OpenAI's chat-completions schema

Conversely, Keybrake does not (and won't) broker /v1/chat/completions. The schema work, the token counting, the provider fallback routing — that's LiteLLM's actual product, refined across 100+ model integrations and thousands of deployments. If you point Keybrake at OpenAI, it won't know how to cost a streamed completion or route a timeout to Anthropic. That's correct; we don't want to fragment the LLM-gateway category where LiteLLM is the right answer.

Detailed differences

Different "unit of money" to cap on

A LiteLLM daily cap is fundamentally tokens × price-table-row. A Keybrake daily cap is fundamentally parse-this-specific-vendor-response-and-sum. Those are different engineering problems. LiteLLM's solution is elegant for LLMs because the cost function is uniform; Keybrake's is necessary for SaaS tools because there is no uniform cost function — each vendor returns cost in its own shape and header.

Different revoke implications

When you revoke a LiteLLM virtual key, the consequence is a stopped chat completion. When you revoke a Keybrake vault_key, the consequence is a stopped charge. The stop-latency targets are the same (sub-10-second), but the incident severity isn't — which is why Keybrake exposes kill-switch controls (per-vendor pause, global kill, auto-pause on anomaly) more prominently than LiteLLM does.

Different audit-trail consumer

LiteLLM's audit log is consumed by the AI-ops engineer reconciling token spend. Keybrake's audit log is consumed by the ops-risk engineer (or, increasingly, the finance or compliance reviewer) asking "which customer was charged, by which agent run, under which policy?" The rows are shaped for that second question.

When to ship both

Most production agent stacks running against any money-moving SaaS API ship both proxies. See the longer piece on positioning for the diagram and the x-agent-run-id join pattern.

Try Keybrake

If you've already got LiteLLM, adding Keybrake is a base-URL change plus a vault_key_…. Five minutes.

Get early access