Endava vs Zühlke: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.5/5) edges ahead of Zühlke (4.1/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for large UK programmes, payments and banking, nearshore at volume. Zühlke is the stronger option for regulated industries, medical devices, banking. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Zühlke: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Zühlke |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 1968 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | Schlieren, Switzerland (UK offices in London, Manchester, Edinburgh) |
| Team size | 10,000+ | 1,500–2,000 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations | Swiss engineering discipline in regulated sectors with a UK team of about 150 |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts | Time and materials, fixed price |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | Java, .NET, Azure |
| Industries served | Financial services, Payments, Retail, Media and telecoms, Healthcare | Financial services, Healthcare and medical devices, Public sector, Manufacturing |
Endava vs Zühlke: 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.
Zühlke
Zühlke was founded in Switzerland in 1968 and employs close to 2,000 people, with nearshore centres in Serbia, Bulgaria, Portugal and Vietnam. The UK business marked 25 years in 2025 and has nearly 150 staff across London, Manchester and Edinburgh, led by UK CEO Angela Bishop since October 2024. UK clients include HSBC and NHS England. Its medical-device and regulated-industry engineering background is unusual for a services firm of this size.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Zühlke
| Capability | Endava | Zühlke |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Zühlke
| Framework / platform | Endava | Zühlke |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs Zühlke
| Criterion | Endava | Zühlke |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Zühlke
| Dimension | Endava | Zühlke |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Payments, Retail | Financial services, Healthcare and medical devices, 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. | A medtech company needs software developed under IEC 62304., A bank wants a regulated customer platform built with strong engineering governance. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Endava vs Zühlke: 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 |
| Zühlke | |
|---|---|
| + | Experience with medical device software regulations is rare among UK suppliers |
| + | Nearshore hubs give some cost flexibility beyond the UK team |
| + | Long-standing UK presence with named banking and NHS clients |
| - | Swiss rate cards are high, even with nearshore staff in the mix |
| - | The UK team is small relative to the group |
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 Zühlke?
A typical fit: a medtech company needs software developed under IEC 62304.
Swiss engineering discipline in regulated sectors with a UK team of about 150. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Healthcare and medical devices, Public sector, Manufacturing.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Zühlke
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Zühlke |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs Zühlke (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 | Zühlke |
Use case fit: Endava vs Zühlke
| Use case | Endava fit | Zühlke 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 |
| A medtech company needs software developed under IEC 62304. | Limited | Strong | Zühlke |
| A bank wants a regulated customer platform built with strong engineering governance. | Limited | Strong | Zühlke |
| You need hardware, firmware or IoT work in the same contract | Limited | Strong | Zühlke |
| You want a fixed-price first phase before a longer engagement | Limited | Strong | Zühlke |
Verdict: Endava vs Zühlke
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.
Zühlke (4.1/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a bank wants a regulated customer platform built with strong engineering governance. If your situation matches that, Zühlke is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Zühlke FAQ
Is Endava better than Zühlke?
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. Zühlke's strongest advantage: experience with medical device software regulations is rare among UK suppliers.
How do Endava and Zühlke differ in pricing?
Endava uses time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts pricing. Zühlke uses time and materials, fixed price pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or Zühlke?
Zühlke 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 Zühlke?
Endava's primary differentiator is: UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations. Zühlke's primary differentiator is: swiss engineering discipline in regulated sectors with a UK team of about 150. They also differ in team size (10,000+ vs 1,500–2,000), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Payments vs Financial services, Healthcare and medical devices).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.