Persistent Systems vs Endava: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.1/5) edges ahead of Persistent Systems (4.0/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for payments and financial-services enterprises wanting mid-tier CEE delivery scale. Persistent Systems is the stronger option for mid-large enterprise programs that don't need mega-giant scale. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Persistent Systems vs Endava: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Persistent Systems | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1990 | 2000 |
| HQ | Pune, India | London, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 23,900+ | 11,300+ |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A public Indian IT company sized between the true mega-giants and the mid-market global players | A publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms |
| Pricing model | Enterprise consulting and dedicated-team engagements | Dedicated-team and consulting engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | AWS, Azure, Salesforce | Java, .NET, AWS |
| Industries served | Technology, Life sciences, Financial services, Healthcare | Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail |
Persistent Systems vs Endava: overview
Persistent Systems
Persistent Systems was founded in Pune, India in 1990 and has grown to nearly 24,000 employees, occupying a middle tier between the true mega-giants on this list and the mid-market global players: large enough for serious enterprise programs, small enough that account relationships are less layered. Its practice covers software engineering, data, AI, and cloud services for enterprise clients, with a particular focus on technology and life sciences sectors. Its scale sits well below Accenture or TCS but comfortably above most of the boutique firms reviewed here.
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.
Services and capabilities: Persistent Systems vs Endava
| Capability | Persistent Systems | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise modernization | ✓ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| AI/ML development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Custom software development | ✗ | ✓ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Persistent Systems vs Endava
| Framework / platform | Persistent Systems | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | N/A |
| SAP | N/A | N/A |
| Java | N/A | ✓ |
| React | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Persistent Systems vs Endava
| Criterion | Persistent Systems | 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: Persistent Systems vs Endava
| Dimension | Persistent Systems | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Technology, Life sciences, Financial services | Payments, Banking, Insurance |
| Best use cases | A life sciences or technology company wanting a public, mid-large Indian IT vendor., An enterprise program too large for a boutique but not requiring mega-giant scale. | A payments or banking enterprise wanting a publicly listed, CEE-delivered vendor., A buyer wanting mid-tier scale without mega-giant account layers. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
Persistent Systems vs Endava: pros and cons
| Persistent Systems | |
|---|---|
| + | Public-company scale and financial transparency without mega-giant account layers. |
| + | Genuine technology and life sciences vertical depth. |
| + | Three decades of continuous operation since 1990. |
| - | Smaller global delivery capacity than Accenture, TCS, or Capgemini for the very largest programs |
| - | Less brand recognition outside India and the technology/life sciences sectors specifically |
| 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 |
Who should choose Persistent Systems?
A typical fit: a life sciences or technology company wanting a public, mid-large Indian IT vendor.
A public Indian IT company sized between the true mega-giants and the mid-market global players. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Technology, Life sciences, Financial services, Healthcare.
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.
Decision matrix: Persistent Systems vs Endava
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Persistent Systems |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Persistent Systems |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Persistent Systems (Not published) vs Endava (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Persistent Systems |
| 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: Persistent Systems vs Endava
| Use case | Persistent Systems fit | Endava fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A life sciences or technology company wanting a public, mid-large Indian IT vendor. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| An enterprise program too large for a boutique but not requiring mega-giant scale. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| 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 |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Persistent Systems vs Endava
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.
Persistent Systems (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need an enterprise program too large for a boutique but not requiring mega-giant scale. If your situation matches that, Persistent Systems is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Persistent Systems vs Endava FAQ
Is Persistent Systems better than Endava?
Endava (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Persistent Systems's strongest advantage: public-company scale and financial transparency without mega-giant account layers. Endava's strongest advantage: publicly listed on the NYSE, giving financial transparency at a mid-tier scale.
How do Persistent Systems and Endava differ in pricing?
Persistent Systems uses enterprise consulting and dedicated-team 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: Persistent Systems or Endava?
Persistent Systems 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 Persistent Systems and Endava?
Persistent Systems's primary differentiator is: a public Indian IT company sized between the true mega-giants and the mid-market global players. Endava's primary differentiator is: a publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms. They also differ in team size (23,900+ vs 11,300+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Technology, Life sciences vs Payments, Banking).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.