Made Tech vs Ciklum: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Made Tech (4.1/5) edges ahead of Ciklum (4.1/5) overall. Made Tech is the better choice for UK central and local government buyers. Ciklum is the stronger option for large dedicated teams with a London contract. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Made Tech vs Ciklum: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Made Tech | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2008 | 2002 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | London, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 400–500 | 3,000–4,500 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog | London headquarters with a long history of large dedicated teams in Ukraine and Central Europe |
| Pricing model | Framework call-offs, time and materials, fixed price | Dedicated team, time and materials, managed service |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Ruby, Python, Java | Java, .NET, Python |
| Industries served | Public sector, Local government, Healthcare | Financial services, Retail, Healthcare, Media, Travel |
Made Tech vs Ciklum: overview
Made Tech
Made Tech was founded in London in 2008 and listed on AIM in 2021. FY25 revenue (to May 2025) rose 20% to £46.4m with a contracted backlog of £92.2m, and the company reported around 430 employees after a period of hiring. Almost all of its work is for UK central and local government, health and other regulated bodies. Contractor use rose to 19% of the workforce in FY25, and management has said it plans to bring that back toward 10%.
Ciklum
Danish entrepreneur Torben Majgaard started Ciklum in 2002 in Kyiv. It is now headquartered in London's Shoreditch and employs around 4,000 people. Its investors have included Horizon Capital, a fund associated with George Soros, and Dragon Capital, but current ownership is not publicly documented. Delivery is concentrated in Ukraine and Poland, plus the Czech Republic since its 2021 acquisition of Prague-based CN Group.
Services and capabilities: Made Tech vs Ciklum
| Capability | Made Tech | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile app development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data & AI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Legacy modernisation | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✓ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Made Tech vs Ciklum
| Framework / platform | Made Tech | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | N/A | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Made Tech vs Ciklum
| Criterion | Made Tech | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Time and materials | Dedicated team, Managed service, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Made Tech vs Ciklum
| Dimension | Made Tech | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Public sector, Local government, Healthcare | Financial services, Retail, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | A council wants legacy case-management systems replaced., A government department needs a discovery and alpha phase for a new service. | A retailer needs a 30-person e-commerce team., A healthcare firm wants a managed QA and testing service. |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Dedicated team |
Made Tech vs Ciklum: pros and cons
| Made Tech | |
|---|---|
| + | Deep familiarity with GDS service standards and government frameworks |
| + | Public reporting makes financial health easy to check |
| + | A growing backlog points to sustained repeat business from government |
| - | Little private-sector experience, so commercial buyers have better options |
| - | No offshore delivery, so rates are UK onshore rates |
| - | Contractor reliance roughly doubled in FY25 |
| Ciklum | |
|---|---|
| + | London HQ makes contracting simple for UK buyers |
| + | Twenty years of experience running large remote teams |
| + | Several delivery countries spread location risk |
| - | Ownership has changed hands between investors several times, and the current cap table is not public |
| - | A large Ukrainian workforce means continuity plans need review |
| - | Mid-sized clients may find the sales process heavy |
Who should choose Made Tech?
A typical fit: a council wants legacy case-management systems replaced.
Public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Public sector, Local government, Healthcare.
Who should choose Ciklum?
A typical fit: a retailer needs a 30-person e-commerce team.
London headquarters with a long history of large dedicated teams in Ukraine and Central Europe. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Retail, Healthcare, Media, Travel.
Decision matrix: Made Tech vs Ciklum
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Made Tech |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Ciklum |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Made Tech (Not published) vs Ciklum (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Ciklum |
| 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: Made Tech vs Ciklum
| Use case | Made Tech fit | Ciklum fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A council wants legacy case-management systems replaced. | Strong | Limited | Made Tech |
| A government department needs a discovery and alpha phase for a new service. | Strong | Limited | Made Tech |
| A retailer needs a 30-person e-commerce team. | Limited | Strong | Ciklum |
| A healthcare firm wants a managed QA and testing service. | Limited | Strong | Ciklum |
| 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 | Strong | Limited | Made Tech |
Verdict: Made Tech vs Ciklum
Made Tech (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Development Outsourcing projects. Public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog.
Ciklum (4.1/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a healthcare firm wants a managed QA and testing service. If your situation matches that, Ciklum is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Made Tech vs Ciklum FAQ
Is Made Tech better than Ciklum?
Made Tech (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Made Tech's strongest advantage: deep familiarity with GDS service standards and government frameworks. Ciklum's strongest advantage: london HQ makes contracting simple for UK buyers.
How do Made Tech and Ciklum differ in pricing?
Made Tech uses framework call-offs, time and materials, fixed price pricing. Ciklum uses dedicated team, time and materials, managed service pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Made Tech or Ciklum?
Ciklum 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 Made Tech and Ciklum?
Made Tech's primary differentiator is: public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog. Ciklum's primary differentiator is: london headquarters with a long history of large dedicated teams in Ukraine and Central Europe. They also differ in team size (400–500 vs 3,000–4,500), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Public sector, Local government vs Financial services, Retail).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.