Endava vs STX Next: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.3/5) edges ahead of STX Next (3.9/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for UK financial services firms wanting a publicly listed, London-headquartered vendor. STX Next is the stronger option for UK buyers wanting a Python and data-engineering specialist with a local office. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs STX Next: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | STX Next |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2005 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | Poznań, Poland (delivery centers in Poland and Mexico; offices in the UK, Germany, and the US) |
| Team size | 11,300+ | 150–300 (per company website; independently unverifiable precise figure) |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A publicly traded, London-headquartered company with named payments and banking technology practices | A Python-native engineering culture paired with a staffed UK office |
| Pricing model | Dedicated-team and consulting engagements | Dedicated-team and fixed-project engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | Python, Django, AWS |
| Industries served | Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail | Fintech, SaaS, Healthcare |
Endava vs STX Next: overview
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.
STX Next
STX Next started in Poznań, Poland in 2005 around Python engineering specifically, and has since broadened into AI, data engineering, and cloud work while keeping delivery centers in Poland and Mexico and adding offices in the UK, Germany, and the US. That UK office is a staffed local presence rather than a virtual sales address, useful for a British buyer who wants an in-market contact point for a Python-heavy or data-engineering-heavy build. Its Python-first technical culture is a real specialization most general outsourcing vendors on this list don't claim.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs STX Next
| Capability | Endava | STX Next |
|---|---|---|
| Custom build | ✗ | ✓ |
| Consulting | ✗ | ✗ |
| Integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✓ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Endava vs STX Next
| Framework / platform | Endava | STX Next |
|---|---|---|
| React | N/A | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Node.js | N/A | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | N/A |
| .NET | ✓ | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs STX Next
| Criterion | Endava | STX Next |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Consulting, Fixed project | Dedicated team, Fixed project |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs STX Next
| Dimension | Endava | STX Next |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Payments, Banking, Insurance | Fintech, SaaS, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | A UK bank or insurer wanting a publicly listed, London-headquartered technology partner., A payments company needing named domain expertise rather than generalist development. | A UK company building a Python-heavy backend or data engineering pipeline., A buyer wanting a local UK office contact for a Polish-delivered engagement. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
Endava vs STX Next: pros and cons
| 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 |
| STX Next | |
|---|---|
| + | A real, staffed UK office alongside its Polish delivery base. |
| + | Python-first engineering culture, a real specialty most generalist vendors don't claim. |
| + | Two decades of continuous operation since 2005. |
| - | Python specialization matters less to a buyer standardized on a different backend stack |
| - | Boutique scale relative to the largest firms on this list |
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.
Who should choose STX Next?
A typical fit: a UK company building a Python-heavy backend or data engineering pipeline.
A Python-native engineering culture paired with a staffed UK office. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Fintech, SaaS, Healthcare.
Decision matrix: Endava vs STX Next
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Endava |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs STX Next (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: Endava vs STX Next
| Use case | Endava fit | STX Next fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| A UK company building a Python-heavy backend or data engineering pipeline. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A buyer wanting a local UK office contact for a Polish-delivered engagement. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Endava vs STX Next
Endava (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Outsourcing (UK) projects. A publicly traded, London-headquartered company with named payments and banking technology practices.
STX Next (3.9/5) is worth a look if you need a buyer wanting a local UK office contact for a Polish-delivered engagement. If your situation matches that, STX Next is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs STX Next FAQ
Is Endava better than STX Next?
Endava (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Endava's strongest advantage: publicly listed on the NYSE and headquartered in London since founding. STX Next's strongest advantage: a real, staffed UK office alongside its Polish delivery base.
How do Endava and STX Next differ in pricing?
Endava uses dedicated-team and consulting engagements pricing. STX Next uses dedicated-team and fixed-project engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or STX Next?
STX Next 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 Endava and STX Next?
Endava's primary differentiator is: a publicly traded, London-headquartered company with named payments and banking technology practices. STX Next's primary differentiator is: a Python-native engineering culture paired with a staffed UK office. They also differ in team size (11,300+ vs 150–300 (per company website; independently unverifiable precise figure)), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Payments, Banking vs Fintech, SaaS).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.