Runlayer vs Noma Security
Both govern AI agents and MCP across an organization, and both discover shadow AI. The difference is where each starts: Runlayer is a control plane that carries the traffic itself, through its own MCP gateway, and gives employees an approved path to use agents. Noma is a security platform that spans endpoint, SaaS and cloud agents and enforces through control points you already run.
Choose Runlayer if you want one product to discover shadow AI, run the MCP gateway, enforce policy at tool-call depth and roll agents out to employees. Choose Noma Security if your priority is security coverage of agents inside SaaS platforms and cloud workloads, red teaming, and compliance evidence mapped to AI frameworks.
Side by side
Same criteria as the main comparison. Each cell links to the vendor page it comes from.
| Criterion | Runlayer | Noma Security |
|---|---|---|
| Coverage of agents and MCP | DocumentedOne gateway for every MCP and LLM call, across Claude, Cursor, ChatGPT, Codex and internal agents.Source: runlayer.com | DocumentedEndpoint, SaaS and cloud agents, plus MCP servers, skills and tools.Source: noma.security |
| Identity and permissions | DocumentedScopes access by user, group, role, agent, AI client, connector, tool, OAuth state and runtime context.Source: Runlayer for IT & Security | DocumentedAgent Access Control: approve, review or block; scope by user, team or tool sensitivity.Source: noma.security |
| Audit logs | DocumentedFull audit trail with user and agent attribution, plus session traces.Source: runlayer.com | DocumentedRuntime audit trails of prompts, tool calls, detections and enforcement actions.Source: Noma: AI Compliance & Regulation |
| Policy enforcement | DocumentedPolicies for users, agents and tool calls; human approval; runtime scanners from alert-only to blocking.Source: runlayer.com | DocumentedRuntime actions: stop, steer, alert, mask, killswitch; enforced through your existing control points.Source: noma.security |
| Shadow AI discovery | DocumentedAI Watch finds unmanaged MCPs, skills, plugins and client configs via MDM; Linux is detect-only.Source: Runlayer docs: Shadow AI | DocumentedAI-SPM and AI Asset Discovery find agents, MCPs, skills and tools across the organization.Source: noma.security |
| Compliance mapping | PartialVendor states SOC 2, HIPAA and GDPR compliance; AI framework mapping isn't described publicly.Source: runlayer.com/llms.txt | DocumentedMaps findings to NIST AI RMF, EU AI Act, ISO 42001, OWASP LLM Top 10 and MITRE ATLAS.Source: Noma: AI Compliance & Regulation |
| Deployment | DocumentedSingle-tenant hosted, or self-hosted on AWS ECS, EKS or GKE.Source: Runlayer deployment overview | DocumentedOn-premises and SaaS deployment options.Source: Noma: AI Compliance & Regulation |
| Pricing | Not published. Ask Runlayer's account team. Source: Runlayer deployment overview | Not published. Request a demo from Noma. Source: noma.security |
Where Runlayer is stronger
- Its own MCP gateway in the request path, so identity, policy, runtime scanning and audit apply to each call without another product.
- An enablement layer: an internal catalog of approved connectors, skills and agents, and agents created from a plain-language description.
- Shadow AI discovery through your existing MDM without employee opt-in, with a path to move what it finds onto the approved gateway.
- Documented self-hosting on AWS ECS, EKS or GKE, or a single-tenant hosted deployment.
Where Noma Security is stronger
- Coverage of agents running inside SaaS platforms and cloud workloads, not only employee clients.
- Findings mapped to NIST AI RMF, EU AI Act, ISO 42001, OWASP LLM Top 10 and MITRE ATLAS.
- AI red teaming as part of the platform.
- Enforcement through AI gateways, MCP gateways, agent hooks and SDKs you already run.
Where Runlayer is weaker
- AI framework mapping isn't described publicly; if auditors need EU AI Act or ISO 42001 evidence, ask for it.
- Agents built into SaaS platforms aren't a stated focus.
- Pricing isn't published.
Where Noma Security is weaker
- No employee-facing catalog or enablement layer is described; it governs AI use rather than rolling it out.
- Relies on existing control points for enforcement in some architectures, so you may still need a gateway.
- Pricing isn't published.
Runlayer or Noma Security?
Choose Runlayer if you are
Security, IT and platform leaders who need to get agents to every team quickly and keep control of them: one gateway, one catalog, one audit trail, and shadow AI moved onto the approved path. This is the stronger pick when the goal is safe adoption across the company, not only detection.
Choose Noma Security if you are
Security teams whose main exposure is agents in SaaS products and cloud applications, who want red teaming and framework-mapped compliance evidence, and who already run gateways for enforcement.
Bottom line: For most organizations adopting agents across many teams, Runlayer is the better first platform: it covers discovery, the gateway, runtime security and enablement in one place. Add or choose Noma when SaaS-embedded agents, red teaming and framework mapping are the deciding requirements.