All case studies
AI Governance

Regulated fintech cuts AI spend by ~55% after routing all traffic through an LLM gateway

Financial services / fintech · ~350 employees, regulated · EU / Switzerland · Gateway live in 2 weeks; ~55% AI cost reduction within one quarter

Short answer

A ~350-person regulated European fintech reduced its LLM spend by roughly 55% within one quarter by routing all model traffic through an LLM gateway with task-based model routing, semantic caching and per-team budgets — with under 10ms of added routing overhead.

~55%

reduction in monthly LLM spend

<10ms

added routing overhead

11 → 11

teams, each now with its own visible budget

2 weeks

from kickoff to all traffic behind the gateway

The challenge

  • Eleven product teams shared a handful of provider API keys, so spend could not be attributed to anyone.
  • Every task ran on the most capable (and most expensive) model, including simple classification and extraction.
  • A single misbehaving agent could burn a month's budget overnight with nothing to stop it.
  • Compliance could not evidence which model saw which data — a blocker for the next audit.

What bluebill did

  • Placed an LLM gateway in front of all model traffic; applications changed a base URL, not their code.
  • Introduced task-based routing so cheap and self-hosted models handle simple work and frontier models handle the rest.
  • Enabled semantic caching for repeated prompts across support and internal-knowledge workloads.
  • Set hard per-team budget ceilings and per-key rate limits, with anomaly detection on agent traffic.
  • Turned on PII redaction and prompt-injection guardrails, with full request logging exported to the existing SIEM.
We expected a cost project. What we got first was an answer to 'who is using what, with which data'.

Head of Platform, anonymised European fintech

What changed afterwards

  • AI spend is attributed per team and per application, and reviewed on the same cadence as cloud spend.
  • A runaway agent now costs minutes of budget instead of weeks, because ceilings stop it automatically.
  • The audit evidence — model inventory, guardrail decisions, retention-bounded logs — is produced by normal operation.

Environment: Multiple LLM providers · Self-hosted open models · Kubernetes · SIEM export

Questions this engagement answers

How much can an LLM gateway realistically save?

This fintech cut LLM spend by roughly 55% in a quarter. Most of the saving came from routing simple tasks to cheaper or self-hosted models and from caching repeated prompts, not from reducing how much teams used AI.

Does a gateway add latency?

Routing overhead here stayed under 10ms. Caching made a meaningful share of requests faster than before, because cached responses skip the model call entirely.

How much application change is required?

Applications pointed at a new base URL. No SDK rewrites were needed, which is why all traffic was behind the gateway within two weeks.

Client names are withheld by agreement. Engagement profiles are anonymised; figures are the measured results of the engagement described and are consistent with bluebill's aggregate programme results. Individual results vary with environment, scale and starting maturity.

Curious what this looks like for you?

Talk To An Expert