Kong vs Microsoft
| Criterion | Kong | Microsoft | Kong reason | Microsoft reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| G1 Identity-bound per-call authorization (25) | 6 | 5 | The AI MCP OAuth2 plugin authenticates every MCP request, but per-call checks against the person an agent acts for are not described. [kong-oauth] | Requests are validated with Entra ID JWTs and RBAC at the adapter level, but per-call checks on whom an agent acts for are not described. [ms-gw][ms-apim] |
| G2 Credential brokering (20) | 7 | 4 | Token exchange swaps the client's token for a different upstream token, though token passthrough is also available. [kong-oauth] | Managed identity gives the gateway credential-less access to Azure backends, but per-call brokering for agents was not described. [ms-gw] |
| G3 Human approval and escalation (15) | 2 | 2 | No human approval step was found on the pages read. [kong-mcp] | No human approval step was found. [ms-gw][ms-apim] |
| G4 Server registry and discovery (10) | 6 | 6 | An MCP Registry is in tech preview and MCP servers can be catalogued in Konnect. [kong-mcp] | Azure API Center offers a private MCP server registry. [ms-apim] |
| G5 Audit evidence (10) | 7 | 5 | An MCP traffic audit log and OpenTelemetry metrics are documented. [kong-mcp] | API Management monitoring is documented, but per-call logs tied to a person were not confirmed. [ms-apim] |
| G6 Standards (10) | 7 | 6 | Follows MCP authorization based on OAuth 2.1 with protected resource metadata and token exchange. [kong-oauth][kong-mcp] | JWT validation with Entra ID or other providers and OAuth for backends are documented. [ms-apim] |
| G7 Deployment and buying clarity (10) | 4 | 8 | Konnect and self-managed gateways are documented, but a price for the MCP features was not found on the pages read. [kong-mcp] | The MCP Gateway is MIT open source; API Management is a paid Azure service. [ms-gw][ms-apim] |
| Total | 5.60 | 4.85 | Weighted sum divided by 100. | |
In short: Kong totals 5.60 and Microsoft totals 4.85 on our weighted rubric, a gap of 0.75 points. Kong is ahead on per-call authorization, credential brokering, audit and standards. Microsoft is ahead on deployment. Choose by the criteria your agents depend on, then check deployment and pricing below.
Which one should I choose?
Kong totals 5.60 against 4.85 for Microsoft. The largest weighted difference is on credential brokering. Microsoft is ahead on deployment.
Pick Kong if credential brokering matters most to you.
It scores 7 against 4 there: token exchange swaps the client's token for a different upstream token, though token passthrough is also available.
Pick Microsoft if deployment matters most to you.
It scores 8 against 4 there: the MCP Gateway is MIT open source; API Management is a paid Azure service.
How do deployment and pricing compare?
| Parameter | Kong | Microsoft |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | Kong Konnect or self-managed Kong gateways. | Self-hosted on Kubernetes, or managed through Azure API Management. |
| Price as published | Not found on the pages read. | MCP Gateway free under MIT; API Management billed as an Azure service. |
| Identity provider | Yes. The OAuth2 plugin works against an external authorization server and introspection endpoint. | Yes. Entra ID is the documented identity provider, and API Management accepts JWTs from other providers. |
Full datasheets: Kong AI Gateway (MCP) and Microsoft MCP Gateway and Azure API Management.
Frequently asked questions
- Which is better, Kong or Microsoft?
- On our rubric Kong totals 5.60 against 4.85 for Microsoft. The better choice depends on which criteria matter most to you.
- Do Kong and Microsoft work with my identity provider?
- Kong: Yes. The OAuth2 plugin works against an external authorization server and introspection endpoint. Microsoft: Yes. Entra ID is the documented identity provider, and API Management accepts JWTs from other providers.
- How do Kong and Microsoft differ on price?
- Kong: Not found on the pages read. Microsoft: MCP Gateway free under MIT; API Management billed as an Azure service.
By The Datasheet desk · Published and reviewed 2026-11-03