Arthur vs Regulayer
Side-by-side comparison of framework coverage, pricing, capabilities, and target customers. Last verified recently.
https://aicompliancevendors.com/compare/arthur-vs-regulayerArthur
Continuous evaluation platform for ML, GenAI, and Agentic AI
Arthur provides an AI Delivery Engine that enables teams to launch, secure, and optimize AI applications across the full lifecycle, from pre-production evaluations to runtime guardrails and production monitoring. The platform supports traditional machine learning, generative AI, and agentic AI with metrics for data drift, accuracy, hallucinations, toxicity, PII detection, and custom evals, while keeping sensitive data local via a federated data-control plane architecture. It targets enterprise AI teams in regulated sectors like banking, healthcare, and insurance, offering deployment flexibility (SaaS, on-prem, AWS, GCP) and integrations like webhooks to Slack/Jira. Distinct from peers, Arthur emphasizes agent discovery & governance and open-source Evals Engine components for real-time performance insights.Arthur homepage, Arthur platform, pricing, PR Newswire Series B, ZoomInfo, LinkedIn
Regulayer
Checks human authority before consequential AI acts, enforces human decisions, and creates independently verifiable evidence.
Regulayer checks current human authority before consequential AI acts, enforces human instructions and decisions, and creates independently verifiable evidence of what happened. Aimed at teams needing a human-in-the-loop enforcement layer with tamper-evident logging.
What the data shows
We haven't published an editorial verdict on this pair yet. The comparison below is built from public vendor materials and our taxonomy — no editorialized ranking.
- Shared framework coverage: None documented in common.
- Only Arthur covers: HIPAA, SOC 2
- Shared capabilities: 0 of 12 listed.
Want our editorial take? Email the editors or read our methodology.
At a glance
| Attribute | Arthur | Regulayer |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2019 | Undisclosed |
| Headquarters | New York, United States | United States |
| Employees | 51-200 | Undisclosed |
| Funding | Series B, $42M, 2022, co-led by Acrew Capital and Greycroft; total raised over $60M | Undisclosed |
| Pricing | Contact for pricing | Contact for pricing |
| Website | Visit site | Visit site |
Framework coverage
Capabilities
| Capability | Arthur | Regulayer |
|---|---|---|
| Agent Tracing | ✓ | — |
| Audit Logging | ✓ | — |
| Bias & Fairness Testing | ✓ | — |
| Drift Detection | ✓ | — |
| Explainability | ✓ | — |
| Hallucination Detection | ✓ | — |
| LLM Evaluation | ✓ | — |
| LLM Guardrails | ✓ | — |
| LLM Observability | ✓ | — |
| LLM Red Teaming | ✓ | — |
| Model Monitoring | ✓ | — |
| Prompt Management | ✓ | — |
Industries served
Arthur
- Financial Services
- Healthcare
- Insurance
Regulayer
- None listed
Integrations
Arthur
- None listed
Regulayer
- None listed
Frequently asked
What is the difference between Arthur and Regulayer?+
Arthur is Continuous evaluation platform for ML, GenAI, and Agentic AI; Regulayer is Checks human authority before consequential AI acts, enforces human decisions, and creates independently verifiable evidence. The full side-by-side covers framework coverage (0 shared, 2 unique to Arthur, 0 unique to Regulayer), pricing model, and capability overlap.
How do Arthur and Regulayer pricing compare?+
Arthur: Free tier available; Premium at $60/mo; Enterprise custom, contact sales. Regulayer: Pricing not publicly disclosed.
Which AI compliance frameworks do Arthur and Regulayer both support?+
There is no published overlap in framework coverage between Arthur and Regulayer based on each vendor's own materials.
Get quotes from both
Want a side-by-side proposal? Send a single structured request to Arthur and Regulayer and each will reply with scope, pricing, and timelines. You'll see exactly what we share before submitting.
Vendors pay a flat per-lead fee when they receive a qualified request. That fee does not influence what you see on this page. Details.
Related
Keep reading
Editorial independence: This comparison is free and was not paid for by either vendor. See our methodology.