Codurance vs DataArt: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Codurance (4.1/5) edges ahead of DataArt (4.0/5) overall. Codurance is the better choice for legacy modernisation, engineering-practice improvement. DataArt is the stronger option for travel and finance firms, long-term nearshore teams. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Codurance vs DataArt: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Codurance | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2013 | 1997 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | New York, United States (London office) |
| Team size | 150–300 | 5,000–6,000 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams | Two decades of London presence and specialist travel-industry engineering |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, fixed price | Time and materials, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, Kotlin, C# | Java, .NET, Python |
| Industries served | Financial services, Retail, Media, Public sector | Travel and hospitality, Financial services, Healthcare, Media, Retail |
Codurance vs DataArt: overview
Codurance
Mashooq Badar co-founded Codurance in London in 2013. Its pitch is software craftsmanship: test-driven development, pairing and clean architecture. Besides London and Manchester, it has offices in Barcelona, Madrid and Lisbon, which bring Iberian rates into the mix. Headcount estimates range from roughly 170 to 300.
DataArt
Eugene Goland founded DataArt in New York in 1997, and the company opened in London in 2001. It reports more than 6,000 people as of September 2025, spread across Central and Eastern Europe, Latin America and elsewhere. Travel and hospitality, finance and healthcare are its strongest industries. UK clients get a long-standing London presence with delivery from lower-cost locations.
Services and capabilities: Codurance vs DataArt
| Capability | Codurance | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile app development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data & AI | ✗ | ✓ |
| Legacy modernisation | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✓ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Codurance vs DataArt
| Framework / platform | Codurance | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | N/A | ✓ |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Codurance vs DataArt
| Criterion | Codurance | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Team extension, Time and materials | Dedicated team, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Codurance vs DataArt
| Dimension | Codurance | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Retail, Media | Travel and hospitality, Financial services, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | A company needs a monolith split into services without stopping feature work., An engineering team wants to adopt test-driven development and pairing with outside help. | A travel company needs booking-engine and distribution work., A financial firm wants legacy trading software modernised. |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Dedicated team |
Codurance vs DataArt: pros and cons
| Codurance | |
|---|---|
| + | Strong on cleaning up legacy codebases and raising engineering standards |
| + | Spanish and Portuguese offices provide a cheaper option without leaving Western Europe |
| + | Coaching is built into engagements, so client teams improve along the way |
| - | Small team limits how fast it can staff a large programme |
| - | Iberian rates are higher than Central and Eastern European ones |
| DataArt | |
|---|---|
| + | London office has been open since 2001 |
| + | Specialist knowledge of travel booking and distribution systems |
| + | Delivery spread across several regions |
| - | US headquarters means UK contracts may sit with a non-UK parent |
| - | Headcount estimates vary widely between sources |
Who should choose Codurance?
A typical fit: a company needs a monolith split into services without stopping feature work.
Craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Retail, Media, Public sector.
Who should choose DataArt?
A typical fit: a travel company needs booking-engine and distribution work.
Two decades of London presence and specialist travel-industry engineering. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Travel and hospitality, Financial services, Healthcare, Media, Retail.
Decision matrix: Codurance vs DataArt
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Codurance |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | DataArt |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Codurance (Not published) vs DataArt (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | DataArt |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Codurance |
| Your product includes hardware, firmware or connected devices | Neither; consider an embedded specialist |
Use case fit: Codurance vs DataArt
| Use case | Codurance fit | DataArt fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A company needs a monolith split into services without stopping feature work. | Strong | Limited | Codurance |
| An engineering team wants to adopt test-driven development and pairing with outside help. | Strong | Limited | Codurance |
| A travel company needs booking-engine and distribution work. | Limited | Strong | DataArt |
| A financial firm wants legacy trading software modernised. | Limited | Strong | DataArt |
| You need hardware, firmware or IoT work in the same contract | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| You want a fixed-price first phase before a longer engagement | Strong | Limited | Codurance |
Verdict: Codurance vs DataArt
Codurance (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Development Outsourcing projects. Craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams.
DataArt (4.0/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a financial firm wants legacy trading software modernised. If your situation matches that, DataArt is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Codurance vs DataArt FAQ
Is Codurance better than DataArt?
Codurance (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Codurance's strongest advantage: strong on cleaning up legacy codebases and raising engineering standards. DataArt's strongest advantage: london office has been open since 2001.
How do Codurance and DataArt differ in pricing?
Codurance uses time and materials, fixed price pricing. DataArt uses time and materials, dedicated team pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Codurance or DataArt?
DataArt 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 Codurance and DataArt?
Codurance's primary differentiator is: craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams. DataArt's primary differentiator is: two decades of London presence and specialist travel-industry engineering. They also differ in team size (150–300 vs 5,000–6,000), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Retail vs Travel and hospitality, Financial services).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.