Ciklum vs Endava: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Ciklum (4.3/5) edges ahead of Endava (4.3/5) overall. Ciklum is the better choice for UK enterprises wanting an actual UK legal entity to contract with. Endava is the stronger option for UK financial services firms wanting a publicly listed, London-headquartered vendor. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Ciklum vs Endava: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Ciklum | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2002 | 2000 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom (Kyiv-founded; large Ukraine delivery centers) | London, United Kingdom |
| Team size | ~3,900 | 11,300+ |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | One of the few companies on this list genuinely headquartered in London rather than merely selling into the UK market | A publicly traded, London-headquartered company with named payments and banking technology practices |
| Pricing model | Dedicated-team and consulting engagements | Dedicated-team and consulting engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, React, Data engineering | Java, .NET, AWS |
| Industries served | Retail, Financial services, Media | Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail |
Ciklum vs Endava: overview
Ciklum
Ciklum's legal headquarters moved from Kyiv to London some years after its 2002 founding, which is unusual on a UK-facing list: most outsourcing companies serving British clients are headquartered elsewhere and simply sell into the UK market. Its roughly 3,900-person team still delivers primarily from Ukraine, spanning full-lifecycle product engineering across cloud, data, and digital work for enterprise clients. That London incorporation gives UK buyers a domestic contracting entity, something several peers on this list, however strong their engineering, simply cannot offer.
Endava
Endava was founded in London in 2000 and remains headquartered there today, now listed on the New York Stock Exchange, with roughly 11,300 employees delivering primarily out of Central and Eastern European centers. That combination, UK incorporation with public-company financial transparency, is genuinely rare among the companies serving British buyers on this list. Named practices in payments, banking, and insurance technology give it real depth in the financial services sector UK buyers frequently need.
Services and capabilities: Ciklum vs Endava
| Capability | Ciklum | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Custom build | ✗ | ✗ |
| Consulting | ✗ | ✗ |
| Integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Ciklum vs Endava
| Framework / platform | Ciklum | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| React | ✓ | N/A |
| AWS | N/A | ✓ |
| Node.js | N/A | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| .NET | ✓ | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: Ciklum vs Endava
| Criterion | Ciklum | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Consulting, Fixed project | Dedicated team, Consulting, Fixed project |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Ciklum vs Endava
| Dimension | Ciklum | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Retail, Financial services, Media | Payments, Banking, Insurance |
| Best use cases | A UK enterprise that specifically requires a domestic contracting entity for procurement reasons., A large program wanting UK legal accountability with offshore delivery scale. | A UK bank or insurer wanting a publicly listed, London-headquartered technology partner., A payments company needing named domain expertise rather than generalist development. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
Ciklum vs Endava: pros and cons
| Ciklum | |
|---|---|
| + | An actual London legal headquarters, a step beyond most peers' UK sales presence. |
| + | Large delivery capacity built over two decades of real multi-team program experience. |
| + | Full-lifecycle product engineering practice, beyond narrow staffing focus. |
| - | Delivery workforce is concentrated in Ukraine, so day-to-day contact is rarely UK-based |
| - | Process overhead closer to an enterprise integrator than a founder-led boutique |
| Endava | |
|---|---|
| + | Publicly listed on the NYSE and headquartered in London since founding. |
| + | Named payments, banking, and insurance technology practices relevant to UK financial services. |
| + | More than two decades of CEE delivery experience. |
| - | Mid-tier delivery capacity, smaller than the true mega-giants for very large programs |
| - | Premium pricing typical of a publicly listed, financial-services-focused vendor |
Who should choose Ciklum?
A typical fit: a UK enterprise that specifically requires a domestic contracting entity for procurement reasons.
One of the few companies on this list genuinely headquartered in London rather than merely selling into the UK market. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Retail, Financial services, Media.
Who should choose Endava?
A typical fit: a UK bank or insurer wanting a publicly listed, London-headquartered technology partner.
A publicly traded, London-headquartered company with named payments and banking technology practices. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail.
Decision matrix: Ciklum vs Endava
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Ciklum |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Ciklum |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Ciklum (Not published) vs Endava (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Endava |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: Ciklum vs Endava
| Use case | Ciklum fit | Endava fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A UK enterprise that specifically requires a domestic contracting entity for procurement reasons. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A large program wanting UK legal accountability with offshore delivery scale. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A UK bank or insurer wanting a publicly listed, London-headquartered technology partner. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A payments company needing named domain expertise rather than generalist development. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Ciklum vs Endava
Ciklum (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Outsourcing (UK) projects. One of the few companies on this list genuinely headquartered in London rather than merely selling into the UK market.
Endava (4.3/5) is worth a look if you need a payments company needing named domain expertise rather than generalist development. If your situation matches that, Endava is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Ciklum vs Endava FAQ
Is Ciklum better than Endava?
Ciklum (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Ciklum's strongest advantage: an actual London legal headquarters, a step beyond most peers' UK sales presence. Endava's strongest advantage: publicly listed on the NYSE and headquartered in London since founding.
How do Ciklum and Endava differ in pricing?
Ciklum uses dedicated-team and consulting engagements pricing. Endava uses dedicated-team and consulting engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Ciklum or Endava?
Endava is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each company before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Ciklum and Endava?
Ciklum's primary differentiator is: one of the few companies on this list genuinely headquartered in London rather than merely selling into the UK market. Endava's primary differentiator is: a publicly traded, London-headquartered company with named payments and banking technology practices. They also differ in team size (~3,900 vs 11,300+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Retail, Financial services vs Payments, Banking).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.