Hakkoda vs Endava: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Hakkoda (3.9/5) edges ahead of Endava (3.3/5) overall. Hakkoda is the better choice for buyers wanting IBM-backed stability for data-and-AI advisory work. Endava is the stronger option for enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Hakkoda vs Endava: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Hakkoda | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2021 | 2000 |
| HQ | New York, NY, USA | London, UK |
| Team size | 201-400 | 11225 |
| Rating | 3.9 / 5 | 3.3 / 5 |
| Best for | Buyers wanting IBM-backed stability for data-and-AI advisory work | Enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory |
| Pricing model | Retainer, fixed project | Retainer, dedicated team, T&M |
| Min. engagement | $35K | $100K |
| Primary tech stack | AWS, Azure, GCP | AWS, Azure, Kubernetes |
| Industries served | Fintech, Healthcare, Retail | Fintech, Retail, Telecom |
Hakkoda vs Endava: overview
Hakkoda
Hakkoda was founded in 2021 and is headquartered in New York City, with 371 employees. The firm is a modern data consultancy helping companies harness cloud platforms and AI capabilities, and was acquired by IBM in April 2025 — now operating as Hakkōda, an IBM Company, which buyers should factor into long-term roadmap and pricing expectations.
Endava
Endava was founded in 2000 by John Cotterell in London and is headquartered there, with 11,225 total employees. The company is a publicly traded (NYSE: DAVA) technology services firm offering strategy consulting, data insights, systems architecture, automation, software engineering, cloud computing, and AI technology consulting.
Services and capabilities: Hakkoda vs Endava
| Capability | Hakkoda | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise automation | ✓ | ✓ |
| Agent orchestration | ✗ | ✗ |
| RAG & knowledge agents | ✓ | ✗ |
| Data & analytics agents | ✓ | ✗ |
| LLM integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Workflow integration | ✗ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Hakkoda vs Endava
| Framework / platform | Hakkoda | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| LangChain | N/A | N/A |
| LangGraph | N/A | N/A |
| AutoGen | N/A | N/A |
| LlamaIndex | N/A | N/A |
| OpenAI | ✓ | N/A |
| Anthropic Claude | N/A | N/A |
| Pinecone | N/A | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | N/A | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: Hakkoda vs Endava
| Criterion | Hakkoda | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | $35K | $100K |
| Engagement models | Retainer, Fixed project, Staff augmentation | Retainer, Dedicated team, T&M |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Accessible | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Hakkoda vs Endava
| Dimension | Hakkoda | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Fintech, Healthcare, Retail | Fintech, Retail, Telecom |
| Best use cases | Data-platform advisory for AI agents, Cloud-and-AI capability advisory | Enterprise AI technology consulting, Large-scale systems architecture advisory |
| Typical project type | Retainer | Retainer |
Hakkoda vs Endava: pros and cons
| Hakkoda | |
|---|---|
| + | IBM backing (since April 2025) adds financial stability and enterprise credibility |
| + | Data-platform-first advisory approach suits agents that need reliable data foundations |
| + | Internal AI agent (per Hakkoda Labs) demonstrates applied capability beyond advisory |
| - | 2025 acquisition by IBM changes ownership structure and may shift pricing/positioning over time |
| - | Post-acquisition integration into IBM's broader practice could affect team continuity |
| Endava | |
|---|---|
| + | Publicly traded (NYSE: DAVA) with audited financial transparency |
| + | 25+ years of technology consulting history spanning strategy through delivery |
| + | UK headquarters simplifies engagement for European enterprise buyers |
| - | Large-firm structure means less boutique-style senior-partner attention on smaller engagements |
| - | High minimum engagement puts it out of reach for smaller buyers |
Who should choose Hakkoda?
Hakkoda is the right choice for buyers wanting IBM-backed stability for data-and-AI advisory work.
IBM acquisition (April 2025) adds enterprise backing and cross-sell into IBM's broader AI portfolio. Minimum engagement starts at $35K. Works best with clients in Fintech, Healthcare, Retail.
Who should choose Endava?
Endava is the right choice for enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory.
Publicly traded (NYSE: DAVA) with a UK headquarters, useful for EU/UK-anchored enterprise buyers. Minimum engagement starts at $100K. Works best with clients in Fintech, Retail, Telecom.
Decision matrix: Hakkoda vs Endava
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Hakkoda |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Hakkoda |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Hakkoda |
| 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: Hakkoda vs Endava
| Use case | Hakkoda fit | Endava fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data-platform advisory for AI agents | Strong | Limited | Hakkoda |
| Cloud-and-AI capability advisory | Strong | Limited | Hakkoda |
| Enterprise AI technology consulting | Limited | Strong | Endava |
| Large-scale systems architecture advisory | Limited | Strong | Endava |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Hakkoda vs Endava
Hakkoda (3.9/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Agent projects. IBM acquisition (April 2025) adds enterprise backing and cross-sell into IBM's broader AI portfolio. It is best for buyers wanting IBM-backed stability for data-and-AI advisory work.
Endava (3.3/5) is the better choice when enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory. If your situation matches those criteria, Endava is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Hakkoda vs Endava FAQ
Is Hakkoda better than Endava?
Hakkoda (3.9/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Hakkoda is better for buyers wanting IBM-backed stability for data-and-AI advisory work. Endava is better for enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory.
How do Hakkoda and Endava differ in pricing?
Hakkoda uses retainer, fixed project pricing with a minimum engagement of $35K. Endava uses retainer, dedicated team, t&m pricing with a minimum engagement of $100K. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Hakkoda or Endava?
Hakkoda is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each consultancy before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Hakkoda and Endava?
Hakkoda's primary differentiator is: ibm acquisition (april 2025) adds enterprise backing and cross-sell into ibm's broader ai portfolio. Endava's primary differentiator is: publicly traded (nyse: dava) with a uk headquarters, useful for eu/uk-anchored enterprise buyers. They also differ in team size (201-400 vs 11225), minimum engagement ($35K vs $100K), and primary industries served (Fintech, Healthcare vs Fintech, Retail).