Fiddler AI vs Weights & Biases Weave

Side-by-side comparison of framework coverage, pricing, capabilities, and target customers. Last verified April 2026.

Canonical URL: https://aicompliancevendors.com/compare/fiddler-ai-vs-wb-weave

Fiddler AI

AI observability and security for agentic and generative systems.

Fiddler AI is an AI observability and security platform founded in 2018 and headquartered in Palo Alto, California, by Krishna Gade, Amit Paka, and Manoj Cheenath. Fiddler focuses on production monitoring — drift, performance, fairness, explainability — and has extended into LLM observability and security for compound and agentic AI systems. Fiddler raised a $30M Series C in January 2026, bringing total funding to $100M.

Last verified April 21, 2026Palo Alto, United States

Weights & Biases Weave

Deliver AI with confidence.

Weights & Biases (W&B) is a San Francisco-based MLOps and LLMOps platform founded in 2017. Weave is W&B's product layer purpose-built for LLM observability, evaluation, and governance. It provides automatic tracing of LLM calls (inputs, outputs, latency, cost), evaluation pipelines with human and automated scoring, dataset versioning, and guardrails to block prompt attacks and harmful outputs. Weave integrates with major LLM providers including OpenAI, Anthropic, Google Gemini, and frameworks such as LangChain and LlamaIndex. For AI compliance, W&B runs EU AI Act-focused webinar series demonstrating how Weave can generate compliance dossiers for high-risk AI systems, providing audit trails and evidence generation. The platform holds SOC 2 Type II certification. Enterprise tier includes SSO, RBAC, and private cloud deployment. W&B has raised $305M total and was valued at $1.25B in 2023.

Last verified April 22, 2026San Francisco, United States

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 Fiddler AI covers: Colorado AI Act, EU AI Act, GDPR Art. 22, ISO/IEC 42001, NIST AI RMF, NYC LL 144
  • Shared capabilities: 5 of 9 listed.

Want our editorial take? Email the editors or read our methodology.

At a glance

AttributeFiddler AIWeights & Biases Weave
Founded20182017
HeadquartersPalo Alto, United StatesSan Francisco, United States
Employees51-200201-500
Funding$100M total (Series C, January 2026)Multi-round, $305M total raised across 6 rounds. Most recent: $50M equity round (August 2023) led by Daniel Gross and Nat Friedman at $1.25B valuation.
PricingContact for pricingFree tier available for individuals. Team tier at published per-seat pricing. Enterprise tier (SSO, RBAC, private cloud) is contact sales. See https://wandb.ai/site/pricing for current tiers.
WebsiteVisit siteVisit site

Framework coverage

FrameworkFiddler AIWeights & Biases Weave
Colorado AI ActPartial
EU AI ActPartial
GDPR Art. 22Partial
ISO/IEC 42001Partial
NIST AI RMFPartial
NYC LL 144Partial

Capabilities

CapabilityFiddler AIWeights & Biases Weave
AI Model Inventory
Audit Evidence Collection
Bias & Fairness Testing
Explainability
LLM Guardrails & Content Filtering
LLM Red Teaming
Model Monitoring
Policy Management
Risk Assessment Workflow

Industries served

Fiddler AI

  • Financial Services
  • Healthcare
  • Insurance
  • Government & Public Sector
  • Employment & HR
  • Retail & E-commerce
  • SaaS & Technology
  • Defense & National Security

Weights & Biases Weave

  • Financial Services
  • Healthcare
  • Defense & National Security
  • SaaS & Technology

Integrations

Fiddler AI

  • AWS SageMaker
  • Azure ML
  • Google Vertex AI
  • Databricks
  • Snowflake
  • MLflow
  • Weights & Biases
  • Okta
  • OpenAI API
  • Anthropic API

Weights & Biases Weave

  • OpenAI API
  • Anthropic API
  • Weights & Biases

Get quotes from both

Want a side-by-side proposal? Send a single structured request to Fiddler AI and Weights & Biases Weave 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.

Editorial independence: This comparison is free and was not paid for by either vendor. See our methodology.