Four ways to let AI agents reach SAP and cloud data — and what each gets right and wrong. Honest assessment, not a marketing puff piece. If Joule is the right answer for you, we'll tell you.
| Dimension | AegisAI | SAP Joule | Direct API access | Build your own |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Policy compliance | ||||
| SAP API Policy 4.2026a §2.2.2 compliant | ✓ sanctioned architecture leg | ✓ first-party SAP service | ✗ direct calls violate §2.2.2 once agent plans multi-step | ~ if you implement the carve-out correctly |
| Anti-bypass posture (Section 3) | ✓ strengthens controls (rate, audit, identity) | ✓ SAP-internal | ✗ typically weakens or removes controls | ~ your engineering quality |
| Data system support | ||||
| S/4HANA Cloud / S/4HANA on-prem | ✓ SAML Bearer / Principal Propagation | ✓ native | ✓ but non-compliant | ~ if you build it |
| SAP ECC 6.0 / EHP 8 (legacy) | ✓ Trusted RFC + STRUSTSSO2 + SNC | ✗ ECC not on Joule roadmap | ✓ but non-compliant | ~ if you build it |
| AWS data systems (RDS, Redshift) | ✓ RDS Data API + IAM | ✗ | ✓ | ~ |
| Azure data systems (Synapse) | ✓ Synapse SQL + RBAC | ✗ | ✓ | ~ |
| GCP data systems (BigQuery) | ✓ BigQuery + IAM | ✗ | ✓ | ~ |
| Same architecture across all four | ✓ one gateway, one audit chain | ✗ SAP only | ✗ separate integration per system | ~ if you design for it |
| Agent compatibility | ||||
| Microsoft Copilot Studio | ✓ Custom Connector kit + MCP | ~ indirect (Joule → Copilot bridge) | ✓ | ~ |
| SAP Joule itself | ✓ Joule action manifest kit | (is Joule) | n/a | n/a |
| Anthropic Claude | ✓ tool spec + MCP | ✗ | ✓ | ~ |
| OpenAI ChatGPT / Custom GPT | ✓ action OpenAPI + MCP | ✗ | ✓ | ~ |
| LangChain / LlamaIndex | ✓ drop-in tool + MCP | ✗ | ✓ | ~ |
| MCP (Model Context Protocol) | ✓ native server endpoint | ✗ | n/a | ~ if you implement it |
| Security posture | ||||
| Identity propagation (no service-account masking) | ✓ Trusted RFC / SAML Bearer / Principal Propagation | ✓ SAP-internal SSO | ~ commonly broken in field deployments | ~ requires deliberate design |
| SAP / cloud IAM is sole arbiter (no second authority engine) | ✓ ADR 0002 | ✓ SAP-internal | ✓ by default | ~ tempting to add a second engine; usually a mistake |
| Deterministic policy path (no LLM in policy decisions) | ✓ ADR 0001 | ~ Joule uses LLMs throughout | ✓ trivially | ~ depends on design choices |
| Fail-closed on infrastructure outage | ✓ Redis / Postgres / JWKS down → deny | ✓ SAP-internal | ✗ typically fail-open | ~ rarely implemented well |
| Tamper-evident audit chain (HMAC, row-locked) | ✓ SHA-256 + Postgres SELECT FOR UPDATE | ~ SAP audit log exists; not AI-context aware | ✗ typically nothing | ~ hard to do right |
| Chain-break kill-switch (auto fail-closed) | ✓ ships in v1.0 | ~ | ✗ | ✗ uncommon |
| Deployment | ||||
| Self-hosted in customer's k8s (data sovereignty) | ✓ Helm chart | ✗ SAP-cloud SaaS | n/a | ✓ by definition |
| Vendor sees customer row-level data | ✗ never (self-hosted) or pilot-sandbox only | ✓ SAP-hosted; SAP sees the data | n/a | ✗ internal |
| Time to first pilot | ✓ 14 days (sandbox); see ECC-2027 page | ~ tied to S/4 migration / SAP cycles | ~ fast but non-compliant | ✗ 6-12 months |
| Customer-owned audit log (exportable, retains on termination) | ✓ customer's Postgres | ~ via SAP's own audit infra | ✗ | ✓ internal |
| Commercial | ||||
| Pilot cost | ✓ free 14-day (vendor-hosted) or self-hosted | ~ bundled into BTP subscription | $0 (but non-compliant) | ✗ $50k-200k engineering |
| Ongoing cost | Per-tenant subscription | SAP BTP entitlement | Internal eng cost | Internal eng cost (3-5 FTE/year) |
| Vendor lock-in | ✓ low — open architecture, Helm chart, customer keeps audit chain | ✗ high — Joule is SAP-only and SAP-hosted | ✓ none | ✓ none (you own it) |
Pure S/4HANA Cloud shop, all-SAP, low cross-cloud need. Joule is reasonable. You're already in SAP's cloud, SAP handles the AI for you, the policy compliance is intrinsic. AegisAI adds value when you need agents other than Joule, or non-SAP data, or self-hosted control. Use Joule first; revisit AegisAI when those needs emerge.
ECC 6.0 / EHP 8 shop, 2027 cliff approaching. Joule doesn't support ECC. Direct API access violates §2.2.2. Building your own takes 6-12 months and you don't have 6-12 months. AegisAI is the only path that gets you to "AI agents on ECC, compliant, before 2027." See the ECC 2027 page for the specific argument.
Multi-cloud enterprise — SAP plus AWS / Azure / GCP data systems. Joule is SAP-only. Direct API access is non-compliant for the SAP piece and architecturally inconsistent across clouds. AegisAI's value proposition here is one gateway, one audit chain, one identity-propagation pattern, four data systems. Strongest fit.
You're a large enterprise with deep engineering capacity and 12 months of runway. You can absolutely build this yourself. The interesting question is whether building it is the highest-leverage use of your team's time — what's the opportunity cost of those 3-5 FTE-years against your other priorities? If the answer is "low," build it. If "high," buy AegisAI and your team works on what only your team can.
AegisAI is not a replacement for SAP Joule when Joule is the right tool. We have a Joule connector kit — they're complementary, not competitive, for customers who are firmly in the S/4HANA ecosystem.
AegisAI is not a free lunch on legal compliance. The structured-pathway carve-out in §2.2.2 puts the burden on the carve-out implementation to be sound. Our whitepaper §1.4 walks through six specific places AegisAI tightens rather than weakens SAP's controls — that's what makes it a sanctioned pathway and not a bypass.
AegisAI is not LLM-based. The policy decisions are deterministic Python evaluating a safe AST. The "AI" in our name refers to the agents on the other side of the gate. See ADR 0001.
If you want a 30-minute conversation matching your scenario to the right path — even if the right path turns out to be Joule and not AegisAI — write to hello@aegisai.digital. We'll send back a one-page summary tailored to your stack.
