Common Fate vs Natoma MCP Gateway: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

Common Fate: JIT privileged access mgmt platform for cloud-native teams on AWS & GCP. built by Common Fate. Core capabilities include Just-in-time (JIT) privileged access to AWS and GCP accounts, Time-bound and fine-grained access provisioning, Secure database access control and auditing down to row-level..

Natoma MCP Gateway: Enterprise gateway for managing AI agent access to enterprise data via MCP. built by Natoma. Core capabilities include Centralized MCP server deployment and management, Catalog of verified and monitored MCP servers, Auto-generation of MCP servers from OpenAPI specifications..

Both serve the Privileged Access Management market but differ in approach, feature depth, and target audience.

Common Fate differentiates with Just-in-time (JIT) privileged access to AWS and GCP accounts, Time-bound and fine-grained access provisioning, Secure database access control and auditing down to row-level. Natoma MCP Gateway differentiates with Centralized MCP server deployment and management, Catalog of verified and monitored MCP servers, Auto-generation of MCP servers from OpenAPI specifications.

Common Fate is developed by Common Fate. Natoma MCP Gateway is developed by Natoma. Vendor maturity, funding stage, and team size can be important factors when evaluating long-term viability and support quality.

Common Fate and Natoma MCP Gateway serve similar Privileged Access Management use cases: both are Privileged Access Management tools, both cover Least Privilege, Policy. Review the feature comparison above to determine which fits your requirements.