Comparison

Naboo vs Helicone

Two tools, two layers, one problem. Helicone observes; Naboo cuts the cause. Compose them and the bill flattens.

By Gilad Salinger·CEO & Co-Founder, Naboo··5 min read

The thesis in one paragraph

Helicone is LLM observability - it intercepts calls between your code and the LLM provider and tells you what each call cost, who made it, and which prompts ran. Necessary for finance and ops. Naboo is a Reasoning Layer - it sits upstream of the model and returns a structured chain of decisions instead of the speculative document chunks that fill the context window. The two solve different problems at different layers. Together they're how enterprise R&D environments unblock AI without paying the speculative-retrieval tax.

Side by side

FeatureNabooHelicone
Layer of the stackContext delivery (upstream of model)Observability (downstream of model)
What it returns to the agentStructured chain of decisions, owners, evidenceNothing - it observes calls, doesn't make them
What it changes about costCuts token volume by replacing speculative retrieval with precisionMakes the bill visible, attributable, and rate-limit-able
DeploymentOn-prem or VPC, native RBAC at retrievalSaaS or self-hosted proxy in front of LLM APIs
Integration pointGraphQL + MCP server queried by your agentsProxy layer between your code and the LLM provider
Time to value2-4 weeks via Forward Deployed AgentHours - point a proxy at your existing app
PricingEnterprise contractFree tier + usage-based + enterprise
Compose well?Designed to run alongside observabilityYes - keeps logging the LLM calls Naboo makes for agents

FAQ

Do I have to choose?

No. Naboo and Helicone solve different problems and compose well. Naboo reduces the volume of tokens your agents burn (by handing them the right context the first time). Helicone makes whatever's left visible, attributable, and policy-controlled. Customers running both see a flatter curve in the Helicone dashboard after Naboo ships - the spend that's left is the spend that needs to be there.

If I already have Helicone, why add Naboo?

Helicone tells you the bill is too high. It doesn't tell you what to do about it beyond budget caps and routing. Naboo addresses the cause: the agent is asking the same speculative question multiple ways because it doesn't have the right context. A Reasoning Layer hands the agent the chain - one structured answer per query - and the token volume drops at the source.

If I already have Naboo, do I still need Helicone?

Most customers keep observability in production - knowing where every LLM call goes is necessary for finance, security, and reliability. Helicone (or Langfuse, LiteLLM, OpenTelemetry-based) tracks what's left after Naboo cuts the waste. The two complement, not substitute.

Which one do I deploy first?

Helicone first if you have no visibility today - you can't reduce what you can't see. Naboo first if you already have visibility and the bill is the problem. The two together is the durable answer for enterprise R&D environments where engineers should use AI freely without procurement throttling them.

Related reading

Definition

Reasoning Layer for Enterprise AI Agents

Definition, architecture, and the two tiers - Topic Graph and Decision Graph.

Read more
Definition

What is a Decision Graph for AI Agents?

Decisions as first-class nodes - owners, triggers, blockers, evidence. The primitive AI agents need to act.

Read more
How-to

How to Build a Decision Graph

Seven concrete steps from elicitation to a queryable graph. Two to four weeks via Forward Deployed Agent.

Read more
CFO brief

How to Reduce LLM Token Costs

Don't meter the waste, cut the cause. Reasoning Layer vs observability and caching, compared.

Read more
Guide

Improve AI Agent Accuracy

Accuracy is upstream of evals. Four causes of enterprise AI inaccuracy and how a Reasoning Layer fixes them.

Read more
Architecture

Connect Enterprise Data Sources

Live joins vs stale copies. Warehouse, ETL, knowledge graphs, and Reasoning Layer compared.

Read more
Guide

Overcome GenAI Hallucinations

Hallucinations are a context-handoff problem, not a model problem. Four causes, one upstream fix.

Read more
ROI

How Naboo Saves Cost

Five places Naboo cuts cost in enterprise AI deployments. Four-minute explainer video.

Read more
Hub

Compare Naboo

Every category enterprise AI buyers weigh against the Reasoning Layer - in one place.

Read more
Comparison

Naboo vs Langfuse

Different layers. Langfuse versions + traces; Naboo grounds the agent.

Read more
Comparison

Naboo vs LlamaIndex

RAG framework vs Reasoning Layer. When to use each.

Read more
Comparison

Naboo vs LangChain

Orchestration vs substrate. Compose them.

Read more
Background

Why retrieval was the wrong foundation

How enterprise AI agents got built on RAG, why it falls short, and what a reasoning layer fixes.

Read more
Comparison

Naboo vs RAG

Retrieval vs reasoning - head-to-head benchmarks, architecture, and when to use each.

Read more
Comparison

Naboo vs Glean

Enterprise search vs reasoning layer - when each fits.

Read more
Concept

AI Search vs Reasoning Layer

Search returns links; the reasoning layer returns the chain. When to use which.

Read more
Case study

Global-E case study

How Global-E (NASDAQ: GLBE) gave AI agents secure access to customer data.

Read more
Comparison

Compare alternatives

Naboo vs other enterprise AI agent infrastructure platforms.

Read more

Compose Naboo + observability

2-4 weeks via Forward Deployed Agent. Your Helicone curve flattens. Engineers stop rationing AI.