Bifrost vs LiteLLM: Two Self-Hosted AI Gateways, a Go SDK vs a Python SDK
Bifrost
Open-source AI gateway that puts 20+ LLM providers and MCP tools behind one OpenAI-compatible API
LiteLLM
Open-source AI gateway and Python SDK that puts 100+ LLM providers behind one OpenAI-format API
Veredictos por tarea
Bifrost ships as a Go SDK (github.com/maximhq/bifrost/core) as well as an HTTP gateway; LiteLLM's embeddable SDK is Python.
Bifrost's speed claims, including 50x faster than LiteLLM, are its own and unmeasured by us.
LiteLLM's Python SDK is a drop-in replacement for the OpenAI client across 100+ LLMs.
Pin versions: compromised PyPI releases 1.82.7 and 1.82.8 were live on Mar 24, 2026. If you run the Proxy, move to a release patched for the Sep 30, 2026 advisory GHSA-7hp6-4w63-5g45 (for example 1.100.4 or later on that line).
LiteLLM's docs say 100+ LLMs and its site 140+ providers; Bifrost's docs say 20+ and its README 23+.
Each vendor counts differently; both cover OpenAI, Anthropic, Bedrock, Vertex, Azure and Ollama.
Bifrost documents MCP tool execution, agent mode with auto-approval, code mode, five authentication types, and running itself as an MCP server; LiteLLM documents a central MCP endpoint with per-key access control.
CVE-2026-90898 (CVSS 9.8) sat on Bifrost's MCP client registration path, with management authentication off by default; upgrade to 2.1.0 and enable auth.
LiteLLM lists LLM guardrails in its free open-source plan; Bifrost reserves guardrails for Enterprise.
LiteLLM's CVE-2026-59821, a post-auth remote code execution through custom code guardrails, was fixed in v1.82.0.
LiteLLM emails a 30-day self-hosted Enterprise trial key with no credit card and no mandatory sales call; Bifrost Enterprise goes through a demo request with a 14-day trial.
Neither publishes an Enterprise price.
Comparación de funciones
| Dimensión | Bifrost | LiteLLM |
|---|---|---|
| IA nativa | Con IA | Con IA |
| What it is | Open-source AI gateway: switch an app over by changing only its base URL, or embed it in Go code as an SDK | Open-source Python SDK, a drop-in replacement for the OpenAI client, plus a self-hosted Proxy Server (LLM Gateway) |
| Licence | Apache 2.0 | MIT |
| Provider coverage | 20+ providers per its docs (23+ per its README), including OpenAI, Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex, Azure and Ollama | 100+ LLMs per its docs; its site claims 140+ providers and 1,892 models |
| Spend and access controls (free edition) | Virtual keys with budgets and rate limits at virtual key, team and customer level | Virtual keys with per-key, team and user budgets and RPM/TPM limits |
| Guardrails | Enterprise only | Included in the open-source plan |
| MCP | MCP gateway: tool execution, agent mode with auto-approval, code mode, five authentication types, and Bifrost can itself be exposed as an MCP server | Central MCP endpoint with per-key access control |
| Enterprise tier | Custom pricing through a demo request, 14-day trial; adds guardrails, cluster mode, SAML and OIDC SSO, RBAC, audit logs and VPC, on-premises or air-gapped deployment | Custom pricing through sales; 30-day self-hosted trial key, no credit card and no mandatory sales call; adds SSO and SCIM, audit logs and custom SLAs |
| Vendor-stated overhead | 11 microseconds added per request at 5,000 RPS on a t3.xlarge; its README claims it is 50x faster than LiteLLM | 0.66 ms at p99 with its Rust gateway, per its site |
| Security record | Management authentication is off by default. CVE-2026-90898 (CVSS 9.8, unauthenticated command execution through MCP stdio client registration) fixed in 2.1.0; CVE-2026-86242 (CVSS 8.1, remote plugin load on dynamically linked builds) fixed in 2.0.0 | Default master key sk-1234. CVE-2026-59822 (MCP authentication bypass, fixed in v1.84.0) exploited in the wild and added to CISA KEV on Sep 2, 2026; compromised PyPI releases 1.82.7 and 1.82.8 were live on Mar 24, 2026; advisory GHSA-7hp6-4w63-5g45 (CVSS 9.9, no CVE, published Sep 30, 2026) lets an internal user forge proxy admin credentials, fixed in 1.100.4, 1.101.3, 1.102.2, 1.103.1 and 1.104.0rc2 |
| Community | 8.4k GitHub stars | 53,000+ GitHub stars per its site |
| AI-native verdict | powered: a self-hosted gateway that forwards requests and wraps them in keys, budgets, routing and caching | powered: a proxy that forwards requests and wraps them in keys, budgets, routing and logging |
Same job; the embeddable SDK is Go for Bifrost and Python for LiteLLM
Both permissive open source
LiteLLM covers more providers by both vendors' own counts
Comparable in both free editions
LiteLLM includes guardrails at $0
Bifrost documents a broader MCP surface
Neither publishes a price; LiteLLM's trial is longer and needs no sales contact
Both are vendor figures from different setups; we have measured neither
Both ship insecure defaults and critical flaws; LiteLLM's MCP flaw is confirmed exploited in the wild and its newest advisory scores higher (9.9 vs 9.8)
LiteLLM's community is several times larger
Both powered
¿Aún dudas entre estas dos?
Elegir es la parte fácil. El trabajo está en ponerla en marcha dentro de tu empresa, con tus datos y con tu equipo usándola. Nosotros hacemos las dos cosas.
La conversación funciona con Gnosari, una de las herramientas de este directorio. Una conversación real, no un guion de ventas.