Noma Security vs Cranium: Which One Covers More of the OWASP LLM Top 10 in 2026?
Noma Security and Cranium are both AI-SPM / Runtime Protection vendors. Noma Security covers 5 of 10 OWASP LLM risks and Cranium covers 1, as of 2026-07-13. Based on llmthreat's coverage scoring, Noma Security covers more of the OWASP LLM Top 10 (5 vs 1). The full row-by-row diff is below.
Sponsored Comparison — this slot is available to category sponsors. Paid placement does not alter the coverage data or verdict below.
Spec comparison
| Attribute | Noma Security | Cranium |
|---|---|---|
| Category | AI-SPM / Runtime Protection | AI-SPM / Runtime Protection |
| Deployment | SaaS and self-hosted (enterprise); covers full AI/agent lifecycle | SaaS (app.cranium.ai) |
| Best for | Enterprises wanting one platform for AI/ML supply-chain posture, agent runtime protection and framework-mapped governance | Enterprises needing to discover and inventory AI models/data/vendors (AI Bill of Materials), map exposure, and stress-test models across a large AI estate |
| Founded | 2023 | 2023 |
| Funding | $132M | $32M |
| Status | Active | Active |
OWASP LLM Top 10 coverage: Noma Security vs Cranium
This diff is llmthreat's editorial read of both vendors' public documentation as of 2026-07-13, not an audited or vendor-endorsed score.
| OWASP LLM Risk | Noma Security | Cranium |
|---|---|---|
| LLM01 Prompt Injection | Covered | Partial |
| LLM02 Sensitive Information Disclosure | Covered | Partial |
| LLM03 Supply Chain | Covered | Covered |
| LLM04 Data and Model Poisoning | Covered | Partial |
| LLM05 Improper Output Handling | Unverified | Not covered |
| LLM06 Excessive Agency | Covered | Partial |
| LLM07 System Prompt Leakage | Partial | Not covered |
| LLM08 Vector and Embedding Weaknesses | Partial | Not covered |
| LLM09 Misinformation | Partial | Not covered |
| LLM10 Unbounded Consumption | Partial | Not covered |
Where they differ
Noma Security addresses LLM07 System Prompt Leakage, LLM08 Vector and Embedding Weaknesses, LLM09 Misinformation, LLM10 Unbounded Consumption — risks where Cranium scores Not covered or Unverified.
On the rest, they overlap. Past those gaps the decision is depth per risk, deployment, and price, not breadth.
Which should you choose?
Noma Security edges it on breadth, 5 covered risks to 1. Noma Security is built for enterprises wanting one platform for AI/ML supply-chain posture, agent runtime protection and framework-mapped governance, while Cranium suits enterprises needing to discover and inventory AI models/data/vendors (AI Bill of Materials), map exposure, and stress-test models across a large AI estate. Both rows sit in the full coverage matrix — read the profiles before deciding: Noma Security and Cranium.
Frequently asked questions
Does Noma Security or Cranium cover more of the OWASP LLM Top 10?
Noma Security does, 5 risks to 1 by our scoring. The diff table above shows exactly where they part ways.
Are Noma Security and Cranium independent?
Noma Security is independent; Cranium is independent, as of 2026-07-13.