Endava vs Scott Logic: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.5/5) edges ahead of Scott Logic (4.3/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for large UK programmes, payments and banking, nearshore at volume. Scott Logic is the stronger option for capital markets and government, UK-only delivery required. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Scott Logic: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Scott Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2005 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 10,000+ | 400–500 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations | Trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts | Time and materials, fixed price, capability-based |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | Java, C#, TypeScript |
| Industries served | Financial services, Payments, Retail, Media and telecoms, Healthcare | Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector, Energy |
Endava vs Scott Logic: overview
Endava
Endava is the largest UK-headquartered company on this list built around nearshore delivery. It reported 11,479 staff at the end of June 2025, and the UK supplied 33% of revenue in the final quarter of that fiscal year. Delivery centres in Romania, Moldova, North Macedonia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Argentina and elsewhere let it staff large programmes at below-London cost. Headcount fell from 12,085 a year earlier, which reflects softer demand across the IT services market.
Scott Logic
Former Lehman Brothers executive Gary Scott founded Scott Logic in Newcastle in 2005. It now employs 400+ people across Newcastle, London, Edinburgh, Bristol and Leeds, all in the UK. The firm is best known for trading and capital-markets software and for central government digital work. Every engineer is UK-based, which suits security-cleared and data-sensitive projects but rules out offshore cost savings.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Scott Logic
| Capability | Endava | Scott Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile app development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data & AI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Legacy modernisation | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✗ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Endava vs Scott Logic
| Framework / platform | Endava | Scott Logic |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | ✓ | N/A |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs Scott Logic
| Criterion | Endava | Scott Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Managed service, Time and materials | Fixed project, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs Scott Logic
| Dimension | Endava | Scott Logic |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Payments, Retail | Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector |
| Best use cases | A UK bank needs 50+ engineers for a multi-year core platform programme., A payments company wants a managed service covering development, testing and support. | An investment bank needs a trading front end rebuilt by a UK-cleared team., A government department needs a digital service built to GDS standards. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Endava vs Scott Logic: pros and cons
| Endava | |
|---|---|
| + | Public-company reporting gives buyers audited figures on headcount, revenue and client concentration |
| + | A UK board and London HQ simplify contracting and data-protection discussions for UK buyers |
| + | Delivery from several countries spreads risk if one location is disrupted |
| + | Long payments and banking track record with UK and European institutions |
| - | Headcount dropped about 5% in the year to June 2025 as demand softened |
| - | Smaller projects can get less senior attention than flagship accounts |
| - | Day rates are higher than those of smaller Central European vendors |
| Scott Logic | |
|---|---|
| + | UK-only staffing makes security clearance and data-residency requirements straightforward |
| + | Rare depth in trading platforms and low-latency financial software |
| + | Regional offices outside London keep rates below the big London consultancies |
| - | No nearshore or offshore delivery, so rates are UK onshore rates for every role |
| - | Narrower industry spread than generalist outsourcing vendors |
Who should choose Endava?
A typical fit: a UK bank needs 50+ engineers for a multi-year core platform programme.
UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Payments, Retail, Media and telecoms, Healthcare.
Who should choose Scott Logic?
A typical fit: an investment bank needs a trading front end rebuilt by a UK-cleared team.
Trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector, Energy.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Scott Logic
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Scott Logic |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs Scott Logic (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Endava |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Neither lists team extension; ask about dedicated teams |
| Your product includes hardware, firmware or connected devices | Neither; consider an embedded specialist |
Use case fit: Endava vs Scott Logic
| Use case | Endava fit | Scott Logic fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A UK bank needs 50+ engineers for a multi-year core platform programme. | Strong | Limited | Endava |
| A payments company wants a managed service covering development, testing and support. | Strong | Limited | Endava |
| An investment bank needs a trading front end rebuilt by a UK-cleared team. | Limited | Strong | Scott Logic |
| A government department needs a digital service built to GDS standards. | Limited | Strong | Scott Logic |
| You need hardware, firmware or IoT work in the same contract | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| You want a fixed-price first phase before a longer engagement | Limited | Strong | Scott Logic |
Verdict: Endava vs Scott Logic
Endava (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Development Outsourcing projects. UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations.
Scott Logic (4.3/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a government department needs a digital service built to GDS standards. If your situation matches that, Scott Logic is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Scott Logic FAQ
Is Endava better than Scott Logic?
Endava (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Endava's strongest advantage: public-company reporting gives buyers audited figures on headcount, revenue and client concentration. Scott Logic's strongest advantage: UK-only staffing makes security clearance and data-residency requirements straightforward.
How do Endava and Scott Logic differ in pricing?
Endava uses time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts pricing. Scott Logic uses time and materials, fixed price, capability-based pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or Scott Logic?
Scott Logic 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 Scott Logic?
Endava's primary differentiator is: UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations. Scott Logic's primary differentiator is: trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK. They also differ in team size (10,000+ vs 400–500), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Payments vs Financial services, Capital markets).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.