Endava vs Ciklum: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.1/5) edges ahead of Ciklum (3.9/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for payments and financial-services enterprises wanting mid-tier CEE delivery scale. Ciklum is the stronger option for enterprises wanting mid-tier scale between the boutiques and the mega-giants. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Ciklum: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2002 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | London, United Kingdom (Kyiv-founded; large Ukraine delivery centers) |
| Team size | 11,300+ | ~3,900 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms | A genuine middle tier between boutique-scale Ukrainian firms and the mega-giants, built through two decades of acquisitions |
| Pricing model | Dedicated-team and consulting engagements | Dedicated-team and consulting engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | Java, React, Data engineering |
| Industries served | Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail | Retail, Financial services, Media |
Endava vs Ciklum: overview
Endava
Endava was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in London, with roughly 11,300 employees delivering outsourced software development and IT consulting primarily through Central and Eastern European delivery centers. Listed on the New York Stock Exchange, it occupies a mid-tier scale below the true mega-giants but well above most boutique firms, with named practices in payments, banking, and insurance technology. Its CEE-anchored delivery model puts it in similar territory to EPAM, though at roughly a fifth of EPAM's global headcount.
Ciklum
Ciklum was founded in Kyiv in 2002 and has since moved its legal headquarters to London, growing its roughly 3,900-person team through both organic growth and acquisitions into a scale that sits below SoftServe and EPAM but above most boutique firms on this list. Its practice spans full-lifecycle product engineering across cloud, data, and digital work for enterprise clients. A buyer prioritizing Ukraine-headquartered status specifically, rather than Ukraine-delivered only, should verify current corporate structure before assuming continuity from its founding story.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Ciklum
| Capability | Endava | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise modernization | ✗ | ✓ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| AI/ML development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Endava vs Ciklum
| Framework / platform | Endava | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| AWS | ✓ | N/A |
| Azure | N/A | N/A |
| SAP | N/A | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs Ciklum
| Criterion | Endava | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| 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: Endava vs Ciklum
| Dimension | Endava | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Payments, Banking, Insurance | Retail, Financial services, Media |
| Best use cases | A payments or banking enterprise wanting a publicly listed, CEE-delivered vendor., A buyer wanting mid-tier scale without mega-giant account layers. | An enterprise wanting mid-tier delivery scale without mega-giant account overhead., A buyer that wants Ukraine-rooted engineering culture at a larger scale than a boutique. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
Endava vs Ciklum: pros and cons
| Endava | |
|---|---|
| + | Publicly listed on the NYSE, giving financial transparency at a mid-tier scale. |
| + | Named payments, banking, and insurance technology practices. |
| + | Central and Eastern European delivery model with more than two decades of history. |
| - | Much smaller global delivery capacity than the true mega-giants for the largest programs |
| - | Less geographic diversity than firms with delivery centers across multiple continents |
| Ciklum | |
|---|---|
| + | Mid-tier scale, larger than most boutiques but without mega-giant account layers. |
| + | Broadened geographic and skill footprint through acquisitions over two decades. |
| + | Full-lifecycle product engineering practice, beyond narrow staffing focus. |
| - | Legal headquarters moved from Kyiv to London, so buyers wanting Ukraine-domiciled should verify directly |
| - | A fraction of the scale of the true mega-giants for the largest global programs |
Who should choose Endava?
A typical fit: a payments or banking enterprise wanting a publicly listed, CEE-delivered vendor.
A publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail.
Who should choose Ciklum?
A typical fit: an enterprise wanting mid-tier delivery scale without mega-giant account overhead.
A genuine middle tier between boutique-scale Ukrainian firms and the mega-giants, built through two decades of acquisitions. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Retail, Financial services, Media.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Ciklum
| 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 Ciklum (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 Ciklum
| Use case | Endava fit | Ciklum fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A payments or banking enterprise wanting a publicly listed, CEE-delivered vendor. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A buyer wanting mid-tier scale without mega-giant account layers. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| An enterprise wanting mid-tier delivery scale without mega-giant account overhead. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A buyer that wants Ukraine-rooted engineering culture at a larger scale than a boutique. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Endava vs Ciklum
Endava (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IT Outsourcing projects. A publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms.
Ciklum (3.9/5) is worth a look if you need a buyer that wants Ukraine-rooted engineering culture at a larger scale than a boutique. If your situation matches that, Ciklum is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Ciklum FAQ
Is Endava better than Ciklum?
Endava (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Endava's strongest advantage: publicly listed on the NYSE, giving financial transparency at a mid-tier scale. Ciklum's strongest advantage: mid-tier scale, larger than most boutiques but without mega-giant account layers.
How do Endava and Ciklum differ in pricing?
Endava uses dedicated-team and consulting engagements pricing. Ciklum 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: Endava or Ciklum?
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 Endava and Ciklum?
Endava's primary differentiator is: a publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms. Ciklum's primary differentiator is: a genuine middle tier between boutique-scale Ukrainian firms and the mega-giants, built through two decades of acquisitions. They also differ in team size (11,300+ vs ~3,900), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Payments, Banking vs Retail, Financial services).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.