Endava vs Innowise: full comparison for 2026
Last updated: August 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.0/5) edges ahead of Innowise (3.8/5) 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.. Innowise is the stronger option for european enterprises wanting agentic AI bundled with large-scale custom software development capacity from an EU entity.. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Innowise: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Innowise |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2007 |
| HQ | London, UK | Warsaw, Poland |
| Team size | 10,000+ | 3,500+ |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Best for | UK and European enterprises wanting a vendor that has publicly documented using agentic AI on its own internal delivery methodology. | European enterprises wanting agentic AI bundled with large-scale custom software development capacity from an EU entity. |
| Pricing model | Dedicated team, retainer, time & materials | Fixed project, dedicated team, staff augmentation |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Python, OpenAI, LangChain | Python, LangChain, AWS |
| Industries served | Financial Services, Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Healthcare | Healthcare, Financial Services, Retail & E-commerce, Manufacturing |
Endava vs Innowise: 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.
Innowise
Innowise is an international full-cycle software development company founded in 2007 and headquartered in Warsaw, Poland, bringing together more than 3,500 IT professionals across a broad portfolio of custom software, and more recently agentic AI services. Its scale gives it capacity for large, multi-team European programs, though its origins are as a generalist software house rather than an agentic-AI-first specialist. As a Polish EU entity, it sits fully within EU jurisdiction for its headquarters operations.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Innowise
| Capability | Endava | Innowise |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-agent orchestration | ✓ | ✗ |
| RAG / knowledge integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Workflow & systems integration | ✓ | ✓ |
| Coding agents | ✓ | ✗ |
| Monitoring & anomaly detection | ✗ | ✗ |
| Customer-facing agents | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Endava vs Innowise
| Framework / platform | Endava | Innowise |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Innowise
| Criterion | Endava | Innowise |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Retainer, Time & materials | Fixed project, Dedicated team, Staff augmentation |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs Innowise
| Dimension | Endava | Innowise |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial Services, Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce | Healthcare, Financial Services, Retail & E-commerce |
| 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 | Bundling agentic AI development with a larger custom software build under an EU entity, Large-scale staff augmentation for an in-house European AI team that needs more capacity |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Endava vs Innowise: 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 |
| Innowise | |
|---|---|
| + | 3,500+ IT professionals gives significant capacity for large or multi-workstream European programs |
| + | EU-headquartered (Poland) for its central operations |
| + | Full-cycle software development background covers everything from design through deployment |
| + | Nearly two decades of operating history since 2007 |
| - | Generalist software-development origins mean agentic AI depth is newer than its overall tenure |
| - | Very large organization size can mean less senior-architect access than boutique competitors |
| - | Public case studies emphasize breadth of software services more than agentic-specific outcomes |
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 Innowise?
Innowise is the right choice for european enterprises wanting agentic AI bundled with large-scale custom software development capacity from an EU entity..
Full-cycle software development scale (3,500+ engineers), EU-headquartered (Poland), applied to agentic AI as an extension of a broad existing practice.. Minimum engagement starts at $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Healthcare, Financial Services, Retail & E-commerce, Manufacturing.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Innowise
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Innowise |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs Innowise ($20K (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 Innowise
| Use case | Endava fit | Innowise 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 |
| Bundling agentic AI development with a larger custom software build under an EU entity | Limited | Strong | Innowise |
| Large-scale staff augmentation for an in-house European AI team that needs more capacity | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Strong | Innowise |
Verdict: Endava vs Innowise
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..
Innowise (3.8/5) is the better choice when european enterprises wanting agentic AI bundled with large-scale custom software development capacity from an EU entity.. If your situation matches those criteria, Innowise is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Innowise FAQ
Is Endava better than Innowise?
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.. Innowise is better for european enterprises wanting agentic AI bundled with large-scale custom software development capacity from an EU entity..
How do Endava and Innowise differ in pricing?
Endava uses dedicated team, retainer, time & materials pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Innowise uses fixed project, dedicated team, staff augmentation pricing with a minimum engagement of $20K (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 Innowise?
Endava 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 Innowise?
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.. Innowise's primary differentiator is: full-cycle software development scale (3,500+ engineers), eu-headquartered (poland), applied to agentic ai as an extension of a broad existing practice.. They also differ in team size (10,000+ vs 3,500+), minimum engagement (Not published vs $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (Financial Services, Technology & SaaS vs Healthcare, Financial Services).
Last reviewed: August 2026. Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.