Top IT Outsourcing Companies

Endava vs Yalantis: full comparison for 2026

Quick verdict

Endava (4.1/5) edges ahead of Yalantis (3.8/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for payments and financial-services enterprises wanting mid-tier CEE delivery scale. Yalantis is the stronger option for regulated healthtech and IoT product companies wanting compliance-literate specialists. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.

Endava vs Yalantis: head-to-head summary

Criterion Endava Yalantis
Founded 2000 2008
HQ London, United Kingdom Warsaw, Poland (Dnipro-founded)
Team size 11,300+ 201–500
Rating 4.1 / 5 3.8 / 5
Primary differentiator A publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms A compliance-focused healthcare and IoT specialization, narrower and more regulatory-literate than the generalist giants
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 React Native, Node.js, AWS
Industries served Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail Healthcare, Logistics, Fintech

Endava vs Yalantis: 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.

Yalantis

Compliant healthcare and IoT product engineering, work regulated enough that a generalist giant rarely prioritizes it, is Yalantis's actual focus, run by a 201-500 person team since the company's 2008 founding in Dnipro (corporate headquarters have since moved to Warsaw). That specialization is a real advantage for a buyer building a medical device or connected-health product; it's simply irrelevant to a buyer needing broad multi-industry capacity, which is exactly what the giants on this list are built for instead. The Warsaw relocation means Ukraine-headquartered status specifically should not be assumed.

Services and capabilities: Endava vs Yalantis

Capability Endava Yalantis
Enterprise modernization
Cloud & DevOps
AI/ML development
Custom software development
Staff augmentation
Dedicated team model

Tech stack comparison: Endava vs Yalantis

Framework / platform Endava Yalantis
AWS
Azure N/A N/A
SAP N/A N/A
Java N/A
React N/A

Pricing comparison: Endava vs Yalantis

Criterion Endava Yalantis
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 Yalantis

Dimension Endava Yalantis
Best company size Startup to mid-market Startup to mid-market
Best industries Payments, Banking, Insurance Healthcare, Logistics, Fintech
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. A healthtech company needing HIPAA- or MDR-aware compliant software development., An IoT hardware company needing both device integration and application software.
Typical project type Dedicated team Dedicated team

Endava vs Yalantis: 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
Yalantis
+ Visible healthcare-compliance and IoT specialization backed by public case studies.
+ Mid-size team large enough for real product programs, still founder-accessible.
+ Warsaw headquarters gives an EU corporate entity for buyers who want that structure.
- Headquarters relocated from Ukraine to Poland, so this is not a Ukraine-domiciled vendor today
- Far too small a team for a program needing mega-giant multi-industry capacity

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 Yalantis?

A typical fit: a healthtech company needing HIPAA- or MDR-aware compliant software development.

A compliance-focused healthcare and IoT specialization, narrower and more regulatory-literate than the generalist giants. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Healthcare, Logistics, Fintech.

Decision matrix: Endava vs Yalantis

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 Yalantis (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 Yalantis

Use case Endava fit Yalantis 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
A healthtech company needing HIPAA- or MDR-aware compliant software development. Strong Strong Both equally
An IoT hardware company needing both device integration and application software. Strong Strong Both equally
Fixed-price build Limited Limited Both equally
Staff augmentation Limited Limited Both equally

Verdict: Endava vs Yalantis

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.

Yalantis (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need an IoT hardware company needing both device integration and application software. If your situation matches that, Yalantis is a competitive option.

Related comparisons

Endava vs Yalantis FAQ

Is Endava better than Yalantis?

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. Yalantis's strongest advantage: visible healthcare-compliance and IoT specialization backed by public case studies.

How do Endava and Yalantis differ in pricing?

Endava uses dedicated-team and consulting engagements pricing. Yalantis 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 Yalantis?

Yalantis 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 Yalantis?

Endava's primary differentiator is: a publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms. Yalantis's primary differentiator is: a compliance-focused healthcare and IoT specialization, narrower and more regulatory-literate than the generalist giants. They also differ in team size (11,300+ vs 201–500), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Payments, Banking vs Healthcare, Logistics).

Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.