Gloo vs Kong
Gloo vs Kong, compared side by side on 18 data points: what each one does, how big it is, what it has raised, the tech running each site, and what users report. We score both out of 100 on traction, team and visibility: Gloo is on 35/100 and Kong on 50/100.
Where each one leads
Gloo
Leads on none of the measures we hold for both companies.
Kong
- our overall score: 50/100 against 35/100
- domain rating: 79/100 against 67/100
- headcount: 987 against 282
- funding raised: $511M against $60.0M
- LinkedIn following: 76,804 against 15,405
At a glance
| Measure | Gloo | Kong |
|---|---|---|
| What it is | AI-powered platform connecting people to faith communities and resources. | API gateway and management platform for microservices and cloud-native applications. |
| Category | FaithTech, Community Engagement, AI-Powered Platform, Non-profit Technology | API Management, Service Mesh, Cloud Native, Microservices |
| Sells toBusiness model | B2B | B2B |
| Offering | Platform | Platform |
| Founded | 2010 | 2015 |
| Headquarters | Franklin, United States | San Francisco, United States |
| Status | Active | Active |
Size, funding and growth
| Measure | Gloo | Kong |
|---|---|---|
| Employees | 282 | 987 |
| Total funding | $60.0M | $511M |
| Latest round | Not published | Series F |
| Valuation | Not published | $2.0B |
| LinkedIn followers | 15,405 | 76,804 |
StartupHub scores
Our own 0-100 ratings. They measure company strength and site quality, not which product suits you.
| Measure | Gloo | Kong |
|---|---|---|
| StartupHub scoreOur 0-100 rating | 35/100 | 50/100 |
| Traction | 31/100 | 60/100 |
| Team | Not published | 70/100 |
| Community | Not published | 15/100 |
| Search visibility | Not published | 31/100 |
| Quality | Not published | 45/100 |
| Agent readinessHow well an AI agent can read and act on the site | F (37/100) | D (41/100) |
| Domain ratingLink authority, 0-100 | 67/100 | 79/100 |
Technology
Detected on each public site, so it reflects the marketing stack as well as the product.
| Measure | Gloo | Kong |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | AWS | AWS |
| CDN | CloudFront | CloudFront |
| CMS | Framer | Not detected |
| Frameworks | Not detected | Next.js |
| Analytics | Not detected | Google Tag Manager |
| Open source | No | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
Gloo vs Kong: common questions
Which is better, Gloo or Kong?
On our 0-100 score Kong rates higher (50/100 against 35/100). The score weights traction, team, visibility and profile completeness, so it reflects company strength rather than which product suits you. We compare the two on 18 data points above: read the rows that match what you are buying for.
How do Gloo and Kong compare on the numbers?
Kong leads on our overall score (50/100 against 35/100), domain rating (79/100 against 67/100), headcount (987 against 282), funding raised ($511M against $60.0M), LinkedIn following (76,804 against 15,405).
Read the full Gloo review and pricing or the Kong review and pricing. You can also browse other Gloo alternatives we track.