Head to head
Neon Zero-Trust MCP Gateway vs Trooth
Same numbers we show everywhere else, lined up. Ratings come from users, the grade comes from our scanner, adoption comes from public registries.
No reviews yet
AI security firewall & DLP proxy protecting API keys and blocking destructive commands.
Full listing
No reviews yet
Look up a witnessed Trust Profile, read a domain's security surface, or verify a Trust Ledger Token.
Full listingThe short version
Neither has been reviewed yet, so the comparison rests on the scan and the public usage numbers. The safety scan favours Trooth (85/100 against 45). Trooth has noticeably more public adoption.
| Neon Zero-Trust MCP Gateway | Trooth | |
|---|---|---|
| User rating | No reviews yet | No reviews yet |
| Safety grade | D45/100 | A85/100 |
| Adoption | New | Growing |
| GitHub stars | – | 0 |
| Downloads / week | – | – |
| Runs where | Hosted (remote) | Hosted (remote) |
| Gateway-ready | Yes | Yes |
| Tools | — | 4 |
| Write actions | — | — |
| Price per call | Free | Free |
| Licence | — | MIT |
| Last release | — | 2026-09-17 |
| Category | Security | Security |