FastRoutervs.Requesty

Requesty has built the best European LLM gateway in the market and made GDPR-grade data residency its core promise. FastRouter is built for global scale with deeper routing, evals, and governance. Where each one wins is genuinely clear.

By Siv Souvam~13 min read
FastRouter
Full-stack gateway · 7 strategies + evals
VS
R
Requesty
EU-hosted · 5% markup · 400+ models

Short version

The quick decision

If you are...Use...Why?
EU data residency is non-negotiableRequestyEU-only by design (AWS Frankfurt). GDPR-grade. Auto PII scrubbing.
Need evals, MCP vault, or deeper routingFastRouterSmart + Auto + GEPA evals, MCP credential vaulting, 7 routing strategies.
European startup that wants a local vendorRequestyEU-HQ, local procurement, aligned regulatory fit.
Global scale, no hard residency mandateFastRouter0% markup, multi-region available, AI Auto Router driven by your evals.

At a glance: Key metrics

MetricFastRouterRequesty
Markup (BYOK)0% with BYOK5% markup on model costs
Routing strategies7 (incl. AI Auto)Smart routing + cascading fallback
Built-in evaluationsSmart + Auto + GEPA + VideoNot in scope today
EU data residencyAvailable on enterprise plansEU-only by design

Feature matrix

CapabilityFastRouterRequesty
Model catalogMajor frontier + open~400+ models, 160+ providers
AI Auto Model RouterPer request, eval-drivenSmart routing (complexity-tier)
Smart / Automatic EvaluationsLive production evalsNot in scope today
GEPA prompt optimizationSupportedNot supported
MCP credential vaultingAgents never see raw keysNot in current docs
EU data residencyEnterprise plansEU-only by design (core differentiator)
Auto PII redactionSupportedBuilt-in, real-time scrubbing

The EU residency question

Requesty is hosted only in AWS Frankfurt (eu-central-1). All processing within EU borders, full GDPR compliance, zero cross-border transfers — structurally, not as a configuration. For European teams whose compliance officer needs to sign off on "no US data transfers, ever," Requesty's posture is the cleanest in the category.

FastRouter offers EU regional deployment as a configuration on enterprise plans with the same zero-data-retention defaults. For teams without a hard EU-only mandate, functionally equivalent. For strict mandates ("control plane must be EU-only"), Requesty's "no other region exists" architecture is structurally cleaner.

Final decision tree

  1. EU residency is a hard, non-negotiable requirement? → Requesty. Cleanest positioning in the category.

  2. Want EU residency plus evals, MCP, deeper routing? → FastRouter with enterprise EU deployment.

  3. No residency mandate, scale matters? → FastRouter. 0% markup, evals, deeper routing.

  4. European startup buying European? → Requesty. Local-vendor argument is real.

Side-by-side

The full feature breakdown

✓ supported, ✗ not supported, ◑ partial.

The full feature breakdown
CapabilityFastRouter Full-stack gatewayRequestyEU-first gateway
Markup on inference0% with BYOK5% markup on model costs (BYOK supported separately)
Model catalogMajor frontier + open providers~400+ models, 160+ providers
Routing strategies7: category, priority, lowest latency, lowest price, highest throughput, weighted, AI AutoSmart routing (complexity-aware), cascading fallback, latency-based, cost-optimization, load balancing
AI Auto Model RouterPer-request, eval-drivenSmart routing handles complexity tiers; not full per-request quality scoring
Smart / Automatic EvaluationsLive production evalsNot in scope today
GEPA prompt optimizationSupportedNot supported
Video evaluationsSupportedNot supported
MCP credential vaultingSupportedNot confirmed in current docs
Live observability dashboardSupportedLive Logs — tokens, latency, cost real-time
Auto PII redactionSupportedBuilt-in, real-time scrubbing
Workspaces / RBACWorkspace-level kill-switchesOwner / Admin / Developer / Viewer; cascading caps
Per-team / per-project budget capsSupportedOrg → team → project → key cascading
Model allowlists per teamSupportedApproved Models feature
EU data residency (Frankfurt)Available on enterprise plans, not the default regionEU-only by design — core differentiator
Zero data retentionConfigurable per workspace on enterprise plansReal-time proxy by default; nothing stored after delivery
SOC 2 Type IISupportedSupported
HIPAASupportedNot explicitly confirmed in public materials
OpenAI-compatible endpointSupportedrouter.requesty.ai/v1
7-day passive auditSupportedNot supported
i
Reading this matrix fairly

Read the matrix by constraint. If GDPR + EU-only is non-negotiable, Requesty's positioning is genuinely better — it's the only thing they do, and they do it well. If you don't have that constraint, the gateway depth gap is the more decisive factor.

EU residency

Where Requesty's positioning is most defensible

Requesty is hosted in AWS Frankfurt (eu-central-1). All processing happens within EU borders, there are no cross-border transfers, GDPR compliance is full, and a Data Processing Agreement is available on request. The zero-data-retention guarantee is structural — the gateway is a real-time proxy, not a logging platform that also proxies — so prompts and completions are never stored after delivery. Encryption is TLS 1.3 in transit and AES-256 at rest for the metadata that does get persisted.

For European teams whose compliance officer needs to sign off on "no US data transfers, ever," that single fact often closes the procurement conversation faster than any feature set on the FastRouter side could compete with. Requesty's positioning as the EU-resident gateway is earned, not just claimed.

FastRouter offers EU regional deployment as a configuration option on enterprise plans, with the same zero-data-retention defaults and equivalent encryption. For teams without a hard EU-only mandate, this is functionally equivalent. For teams with a strict mandate that the entire control plane must be EU-only, Requesty's "we don't even have a US region" architecture is a stronger story.

If your compliance officer's answer to "where does the data live" must be "Frankfurt, only Frankfurt, by design," Requesty wins that conversation.

Routing

Both routers work. The depth gap is real but specific.

Requesty's routing is a clean implementation: smart routing inspects request complexity and matches it to a model tier (cheap models for simple queries, premium for hard ones), cascading fallbacks chain primary → secondary → tertiary providers with sub-20ms failover, latency-based routing tracks live P50/P90/P99 and switches to fastest, and load balancing distributes across multiple providers simultaneously for reliability. The 99.9% uptime SLA is part of the pitch.

FastRouter's seven strategies cover the same ground and add three primitives Requesty doesn't expose today: category-based routing as a first-class strategy (map prompt classes to model groups without building complexity heuristics), weighted shuffle for explicit canary releases, and the AI Auto Model Router that selects per request from cost, latency, and quality signals fed by the eval layer.

For straightforward production routing, the gap is narrow. For teams that want to A/B route between models or have the gateway make per-request quality-aware decisions, FastRouter has more knobs.

Evals & optimization

The widest gap is here

Requesty's product surface is intentionally focused. Observability is real-time and useful, governance is well-designed, and routing is solid — but evaluations and prompt optimization aren't part of the current product. The team has signaled a focus on production gateway and observability rather than offline experimentation tooling.

FastRouter ships:

  • Smart Evaluations — AI quality scoring on live production traffic.

  • Automatic Evaluations — background sampler that benchmarks competing models on your real traffic.

  • GEPA — Generative Evolutionary Prompt Architecture for Pareto-optimal cost/quality.

  • Video evaluations — compare model output on video inputs, exclusive in this category.

If your roadmap includes "we should know which model is actually best for each workload, continuously" — that's where FastRouter pulls clearly ahead.

Governance

Both have real governance. Different shapes.

Requesty's governance model is well-thought-through: Owner / Admin / Developer / Viewer roles with cascading permissions; budget enforcement at org → team → project → key levels with cascading caps; Approved Models lets org admins curate which models teams can call; virtual API keys per project with provider credential isolation; complete RBAC. PII redaction is automatic for emails, phone numbers, SSNs, and credit card numbers before requests reach the model.

FastRouter offers the same primitives plus MCP credential vaulting (agents and tool callers never see raw provider keys — the gateway injects credentials server-side) and workspace-level kill-switches that hard-stop spend. For agentic workloads where MCP servers are calling tools on behalf of the user, the credential vault closes a real exfiltration surface that Requesty doesn't address today.

Pricing

5% vs 0% — context matters

Requesty charges 5% markup on model costs, $6 in starting credits, BYOK supported separately for teams that want their own provider keys, and volume discounts available at the Enterprise tier. The 5% covers the entire feature surface — routing, governance, observability, PII redaction, EU hosting.

FastRouter charges 0% markup on inference when you BYOK. Platform pricing is a flat managed-service fee instead of percentage-of-spend, which means the gateway tax doesn't compound as your usage grows.

At small scale (sub-$2K/mo), 5% is rounding error and Requesty's all-in pricing is genuinely simple. At larger scale ($10K+/mo), the 5% delta becomes meaningful: $500/mo at $10K, $5,000/mo at $100K. If EU residency is the deciding factor, the 5% is often a fair price for the constraint. If it's not, the 0%-markup math compounds in FastRouter's favor.

Honest take

When each one wins

When Requesty is the better pick

→ Requesty wins

EU data residency is non-negotiable

  • Frankfurt-only by design — full GDPR compliance
  • Zero cross-border transfers, structurally
  • The cleanest answer for European compliance
→ Requesty wins

You want a simple, all-in-one EU gateway

  • 5% covers everything — no plan tiers to navigate
  • Real-time observability included
  • Auto PII scrubbing built in
→ Requesty wins

Your needs map closely to the EU-first product surface

  • Cascading governance is well-designed
  • Smart routing covers most production needs
  • Live Logs dashboard is genuinely useful
→ Requesty wins

You're a European startup buying European

  • EU-headquartered vendor
  • Local procurement and support
  • Aligned regulatory and language fit

When FastRouter is the better pick

→ FastRouter wins

You don't have a hard EU-only mandate

  • 0% markup vs 5% — compounds at scale
  • EU regional deployment available if needed later
  • The EU constraint isn't paying for capability
→ FastRouter wins

You need evals and prompt optimization

  • Smart + Automatic Evaluations on live traffic
  • GEPA prompt optimization runs continuously
  • Video evals — exclusive in the category
→ FastRouter wins

You're running agentic workloads with MCP

  • MCP credential vaulting
  • Per-tool budget caps and rate limits
  • Audit trail across multi-step agent runs
→ FastRouter wins

You want deeper routing knobs

  • 7 strategies including AI Auto Model Router
  • Category-based routing as a first-class primitive
  • Weighted shuffle for explicit canary releases

How to choose

The decision tree

01
If

EU data residency is a hard, non-negotiable requirement

Use Requesty. Their EU-only positioning is the cleanest in the category and the rest of the product surface is solid.

02
If

You want EU residency but also need evals, MCP, and deeper routing

Talk to FastRouter about enterprise EU deployment. Not the default tier, but available alongside the broader feature set.

03
If

You don't have a residency mandate and your scale is meaningful

Use FastRouter. 0% markup, evals, and routing depth compound favorably as you grow.

04
If

You're a European startup that wants to buy European

Use Requesty. The local-vendor argument is real for procurement.

05
If

You're already on Requesty and bumping into the eval / MCP gap

Talk to FastRouter. Both are OpenAI-compatible; migration is a base URL swap and a key change.

Common questions

FastRouter vs Requesty: EU vs Global LLM Gateway | Fastrouter Blog