Endava vs Cogniteq: full comparison for 2026
Last updated: August 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.0/5) edges ahead of Cogniteq (3.7/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for uK and European enterprises wanting a vendor that has publicly documented using agentic AI on its own internal delivery methodology.. Cogniteq is the stronger option for cost-conscious EU buyers wanting a boutique Baltic team for a well-scoped agentic AI project.. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Cogniteq: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Cogniteq |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2005 |
| HQ | London, UK | Vilnius, Lithuania |
| Team size | 10,000+ | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 3.7 / 5 |
| Best for | UK and European enterprises wanting a vendor that has publicly documented using agentic AI on its own internal delivery methodology. | Cost-conscious EU buyers wanting a boutique Baltic team for a well-scoped agentic AI project. |
| Pricing model | Dedicated team, retainer, time & materials | Fixed project, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $15K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Python, OpenAI, LangChain | Python, LangChain, AWS |
| Industries served | Financial Services, Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Healthcare | Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services, Manufacturing, Healthcare |
Endava vs Cogniteq: overview
Endava
Endava was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in London, UK, with over 10,000 employees across 26 locations. It has embedded OpenAI's AI agents directly into its own software delivery workflow, branded as DavaFlow, making it one of the few firms on this list that has publicly documented using agentic AI to redesign its own internal delivery process, not just sell it to clients. As a UK-headquartered, NYSE-listed company, it offers public financial disclosure but sits outside EU jurisdiction post-Brexit for its own corporate entity.
Cogniteq
Cogniteq is a full-cycle software development company founded in 2005 and headquartered in Vilnius, Lithuania, with roughly 75–200 employees and additional offices in Poland and the US. It delivers custom technology services and products across industries, with agentic AI as a newer addition to its existing software development practice. As a Lithuanian and Polish EU entity, it sits fully within EU jurisdiction for its European delivery.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Cogniteq
| Capability | Endava | Cogniteq |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-agent orchestration | ✓ | ✗ |
| RAG / knowledge integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Workflow & systems integration | ✓ | ✓ |
| Coding agents | ✓ | ✗ |
| Monitoring & anomaly detection | ✗ | ✗ |
| Customer-facing agents | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Endava vs Cogniteq
| Framework / platform | Endava | Cogniteq |
|---|---|---|
| LangChain | ✓ | ✓ |
| 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 | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs Cogniteq
| Criterion | Endava | Cogniteq |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $15K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Retainer, Time & materials | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs Cogniteq
| Dimension | Endava | Cogniteq |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial Services, Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce | Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services, Manufacturing |
| Best use cases | Buyers wanting proof a vendor applies agentic AI to its own delivery process before selling it externally, UK and European enterprises needing large-scale dedicated-team engagements | Well-scoped, budget-conscious agentic AI projects for EU mid-market clients, Extending an existing custom software contract with agent capability |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Endava vs Cogniteq: pros and cons
| Endava | |
|---|---|
| + | Publicly documented use of OpenAI's agentic AI in its own internal delivery methodology (DavaFlow) |
| + | NYSE-listed with public financial disclosure |
| + | 10,000+ employees across 26 locations gives substantial bench depth |
| + | Quarter-century of digital consultancy history since 2000 |
| - | UK-headquartered, so post-Brexit it sits outside EU jurisdiction for its own corporate entity |
| - | Minimum engagement figures are not published, requiring direct sales contact for early budgeting |
| - | 26-location scale can mean less senior-architect access than boutique competitors |
| Cogniteq | |
|---|---|
| + | Fully EU-domiciled (Lithuania and Poland), simplifying GDPR compliance |
| + | Two decades of full-cycle software development history since 2005 |
| + | Baltic-region cost base typically undercuts Western European vendors |
| + | Boutique headcount keeps senior engineers hands-on rather than delegated |
| - | Agentic AI is a newer service line layered onto a generalist software development practice |
| - | 51–200 team size limits capacity for large or highly parallel enterprise programs |
| - | Reported headcount varies by source (roughly 77 to 200), worth confirming directly |
Who should choose Endava?
Endava is the right choice for uK and European enterprises wanting a vendor that has publicly documented using agentic AI on its own internal delivery methodology..
A named, OpenAI-powered internal delivery methodology (DavaFlow) — evidence the firm applies agentic AI to its own software delivery, not just client work.. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Financial Services, Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Healthcare.
Who should choose Cogniteq?
Cogniteq is the right choice for cost-conscious EU buyers wanting a boutique Baltic team for a well-scoped agentic AI project..
Two decades of Baltic-region (Lithuania/Poland) EU delivery history at a lower cost base than Western European vendors.. Minimum engagement starts at $15K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services, Manufacturing, Healthcare.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Cogniteq
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Cogniteq |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs Cogniteq ($15K (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Endava |
| 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: Endava vs Cogniteq
| Use case | Endava fit | Cogniteq fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Buyers wanting proof a vendor applies agentic AI to its own delivery process before selling it externally | Strong | Limited | Endava |
| UK and European enterprises needing large-scale dedicated-team engagements | Strong | Limited | Endava |
| Well-scoped, budget-conscious agentic AI projects for EU mid-market clients | Limited | Strong | Cogniteq |
| Extending an existing custom software contract with agent capability | Limited | Strong | Cogniteq |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Endava vs Cogniteq
Endava (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Agent Development projects. A named, OpenAI-powered internal delivery methodology (DavaFlow) — evidence the firm applies agentic AI to its own software delivery, not just client work.. It is best for uK and European enterprises wanting a vendor that has publicly documented using agentic AI on its own internal delivery methodology..
Cogniteq (3.7/5) is the better choice when cost-conscious EU buyers wanting a boutique Baltic team for a well-scoped agentic AI project.. If your situation matches those criteria, Cogniteq is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Cogniteq FAQ
Is Endava better than Cogniteq?
Endava (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Endava is better for uK and European enterprises wanting a vendor that has publicly documented using agentic AI on its own internal delivery methodology.. Cogniteq is better for cost-conscious EU buyers wanting a boutique Baltic team for a well-scoped agentic AI project..
How do Endava and Cogniteq differ in pricing?
Endava uses dedicated team, retainer, time & materials pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Cogniteq uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of $15K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or Cogniteq?
Cogniteq 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 Cogniteq?
Endava's primary differentiator is: a named, openai-powered internal delivery methodology (davaflow) — evidence the firm applies agentic ai to its own software delivery, not just client work.. Cogniteq's primary differentiator is: two decades of baltic-region (lithuania/poland) eu delivery history at a lower cost base than western european vendors.. They also differ in team size (10,000+ vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not published vs $15K (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (Financial Services, Technology & SaaS vs Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services).
Last reviewed: August 2026. Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.