Intuz vs Endava: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Intuz (3.7/5) edges ahead of Endava (3.3/5) overall. Intuz is the better choice for buyers wanting a documented count of live production agent deployments backing the advisory. 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.
Intuz vs Endava: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Intuz | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2008 | 2000 |
| HQ | San Francisco, USA | London, UK |
| Team size | 51-200 | 11225 |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 3.3 / 5 |
| Best for | Buyers wanting a documented count of live production agent deployments backing the advisory | Enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory |
| Pricing model | Dedicated team, fixed project | Retainer, dedicated team, T&M |
| Min. engagement | $20K | $100K |
| Primary tech stack | LangGraph, CrewAI, AutoGen | AWS, Azure, Kubernetes |
| Industries served | Healthcare, E-commerce, Logistics | Fintech, Retail, Telecom |
Intuz vs Endava: overview
Intuz
Intuz was founded in 2008 and is a US-headquartered company with offices in San Francisco and San Ramon, California, plus an engineering center in Ahmedabad, India, and 51-200 employees. The firm advises on and operates production AI agents on LangGraph, CrewAI, and AutoGen, reporting 100+ enterprise deployments across healthcare, e-commerce, and logistics.
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: Intuz vs Endava
| Capability | Intuz | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise automation | ✓ | ✓ |
| Agent orchestration | ✓ | ✗ |
| RAG & knowledge agents | ✗ | ✗ |
| Data & analytics agents | ✗ | ✗ |
| LLM integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Workflow integration | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Intuz vs Endava
| Framework / platform | Intuz | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| LangChain | N/A | N/A |
| LangGraph | ✓ | N/A |
| AutoGen | ✓ | N/A |
| LlamaIndex | N/A | N/A |
| OpenAI | N/A | N/A |
| Anthropic Claude | N/A | N/A |
| Pinecone | N/A | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | N/A | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | N/A | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: Intuz vs Endava
| Criterion | Intuz | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | $20K | $100K |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Fixed project, T&M | Retainer, Dedicated team, T&M |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Accessible | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Intuz vs Endava
| Dimension | Intuz | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Healthcare, E-commerce, Logistics | Fintech, Retail, Telecom |
| Best use cases | Production multi-agent advisory, Healthcare/logistics agent strategy | Enterprise AI technology consulting, Large-scale systems architecture advisory |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Retainer |
Intuz vs Endava: pros and cons
| Intuz | |
|---|---|
| + | Reports a specific, high production-deployment count (100+) rather than vague claims |
| + | US HQ with an India engineering center balances access and delivery cost |
| + | Multi-framework fluency (LangGraph, CrewAI, AutoGen) avoids lock-in to one stack |
| - | Deployment-count figures are self-reported (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| - | Mid-size team (51-200) may face capacity limits on very large multi-region programs |
| 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 Intuz?
Intuz is the right choice for buyers wanting a documented count of live production agent deployments backing the advisory.
Reports 100+ enterprise agent deployments already in production across three named framework stacks. Minimum engagement starts at $20K. Works best with clients in Healthcare, E-commerce, Logistics.
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: Intuz vs Endava
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Intuz |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Intuz |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Intuz |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Intuz |
| 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: Intuz vs Endava
| Use case | Intuz fit | Endava fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Production multi-agent advisory | Strong | Limited | Intuz |
| Healthcare/logistics agent strategy | Strong | Limited | Intuz |
| 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: Intuz vs Endava
Intuz (3.7/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Agent projects. Reports 100+ enterprise agent deployments already in production across three named framework stacks. It is best for buyers wanting a documented count of live production agent deployments backing the advisory.
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
Intuz vs Endava FAQ
Is Intuz better than Endava?
Intuz (3.7/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Intuz is better for buyers wanting a documented count of live production agent deployments backing the advisory. Endava is better for enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory.
How do Intuz and Endava differ in pricing?
Intuz uses dedicated team, fixed project pricing with a minimum engagement of $20K. 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: Intuz or Endava?
Intuz 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 Intuz and Endava?
Intuz's primary differentiator is: reports 100+ enterprise agent deployments already in production across three named framework stacks. 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 (51-200 vs 11225), minimum engagement ($20K vs $100K), and primary industries served (Healthcare, E-commerce vs Fintech, Retail).