RTS Labs vs Endava: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
RTS Labs (4.1/5) edges ahead of Endava (3.3/5) overall. RTS Labs is the better choice for enterprises stuck at the AI pilot stage that need advisory to reach measurable production ROI. 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.
RTS Labs vs Endava: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | RTS Labs | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2010 | 2000 |
| HQ | Richmond, VA, USA | London, UK |
| Team size | 51-100 | 11225 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 3.3 / 5 |
| Best for | Enterprises stuck at the AI pilot stage that need advisory to reach measurable production ROI | Enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, retainer | Retainer, dedicated team, T&M |
| Min. engagement | $25K | $100K |
| Primary tech stack | Azure, AWS, OpenAI | AWS, Azure, Kubernetes |
| Industries served | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Logistics | Fintech, Retail, Telecom |
RTS Labs vs Endava: overview
RTS Labs
RTS Labs was founded in 2010 and is headquartered in Richmond, Virginia, with roughly 80-100 staff spread across North America, Asia, and Europe. The firm positions itself as a boutique enterprise AI consultancy focused on moving clients from pilot projects to measurable production ROI, with the architecture and guardrails advisory to support that transition.
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: RTS Labs vs Endava
| Capability | RTS Labs | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise automation | ✓ | ✓ |
| Agent orchestration | ✗ | ✗ |
| RAG & knowledge agents | ✗ | ✗ |
| Data & analytics agents | ✗ | ✗ |
| LLM integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Workflow integration | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: RTS Labs vs Endava
| Framework / platform | RTS Labs | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| LangChain | ✓ | 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: RTS Labs vs Endava
| Criterion | RTS Labs | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | $25K | $100K |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Retainer, Dedicated team, T&M |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Accessible | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: RTS Labs vs Endava
| Dimension | RTS Labs | Endava |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Manufacturing, Healthcare, Logistics | Fintech, Retail, Telecom |
| Best use cases | Pilot-to-production advisory, Enterprise workflow automation strategy | Enterprise AI technology consulting, Large-scale systems architecture advisory |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Retainer |
RTS Labs vs Endava: pros and cons
| RTS Labs | |
|---|---|
| + | 15+ years of enterprise consulting predating the current AI-agent wave |
| + | Explicit advisory focus on production guardrails, not just pilot demos |
| + | US-based HQ eases enterprise procurement and data-residency conversations |
| - | Mid-size team (~80-100) limits capacity for very large multi-workstream programs |
| - | Less agent-framework-specific public documentation than pure-play agent advisory firms |
| 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 RTS Labs?
RTS Labs is the right choice for enterprises stuck at the AI pilot stage that need advisory to reach measurable production ROI.
Explicit pilot-to-production advisory focus with named architecture/guardrails methodology. Minimum engagement starts at $25K. Works best with clients in Manufacturing, Healthcare, 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: RTS Labs vs Endava
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | RTS Labs |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | RTS Labs |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | RTS Labs |
| 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: RTS Labs vs Endava
| Use case | RTS Labs fit | Endava fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pilot-to-production advisory | Strong | Limited | RTS Labs |
| Enterprise workflow automation strategy | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Enterprise AI technology consulting | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Large-scale systems architecture advisory | Limited | Strong | Endava |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: RTS Labs vs Endava
RTS Labs (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Agent projects. Explicit pilot-to-production advisory focus with named architecture/guardrails methodology. It is best for enterprises stuck at the AI pilot stage that need advisory to reach measurable production ROI.
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
RTS Labs vs Endava FAQ
Is RTS Labs better than Endava?
RTS Labs (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. RTS Labs is better for enterprises stuck at the AI pilot stage that need advisory to reach measurable production ROI. Endava is better for enterprises wanting a publicly traded UK-headquartered technology consultancy for AI advisory.
How do RTS Labs and Endava differ in pricing?
RTS Labs uses fixed project, retainer pricing with a minimum engagement of $25K. 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: RTS Labs or Endava?
RTS Labs 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 RTS Labs and Endava?
RTS Labs's primary differentiator is: explicit pilot-to-production advisory focus with named architecture/guardrails methodology. 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 (51-100 vs 11225), minimum engagement ($25K vs $100K), and primary industries served (Manufacturing, Healthcare vs Fintech, Retail).