Endava vs Box UK: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.5/5) edges ahead of Box UK (3.8/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for large UK programmes, payments and banking, nearshore at volume. Box UK is the stronger option for mid-sized web and e-commerce builds. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Box UK: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Box UK |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 1998 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | Cardiff, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 10,000+ | 50–100 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations | Small Welsh team with long-standing enterprise web clients |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts | Fixed price, time and materials, retainer |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | PHP, WordPress, Drupal |
| Industries served | Financial services, Payments, Retail, Media and telecoms, Healthcare | Retail, Media, Manufacturing, Healthcare |
Endava vs Box UK: overview
Endava
Endava is the largest UK-headquartered company on this list built around nearshore delivery. It reported 11,479 staff at the end of June 2025, and the UK supplied 33% of revenue in the final quarter of that fiscal year. Delivery centres in Romania, Moldova, North Macedonia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Argentina and elsewhere let it staff large programmes at below-London cost. Headcount fell from 12,085 a year earlier, which reflects softer demand across the IT services market.
Box UK
Box UK was founded in Cardiff in 1998 and has a second office in London. Directories put its team at 50 to 100 people. It works on web platforms, e-commerce, user experience and managed services for clients including Jaguar Land Rover, Sodexo, the BMJ and RS Components. In June 2025 it announced a partnership with experimentation platform VWO.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Box UK
| Capability | Endava | Box UK |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile app development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✗ |
| Data & AI | ✓ | ✗ |
| Legacy modernisation | ✓ | ✗ |
| Embedded & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✗ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Endava vs Box UK
| Framework / platform | Endava | Box UK |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | N/A |
| Python | ✓ | N/A |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | N/A |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs Box UK
| Criterion | Endava | Box UK |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Managed service, Time and materials | Fixed project, Time and materials, Managed service |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs Box UK
| Dimension | Endava | Box UK |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Payments, Retail | Retail, Media, Manufacturing |
| Best use cases | A UK bank needs 50+ engineers for a multi-year core platform programme., A payments company wants a managed service covering development, testing and support. | A manufacturer needs a B2B e-commerce platform., A publisher wants a new content platform. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Endava vs Box UK: pros and cons
| Endava | |
|---|---|
| + | Public-company reporting gives buyers audited figures on headcount, revenue and client concentration |
| + | A UK board and London HQ simplify contracting and data-protection discussions for UK buyers |
| + | Delivery from several countries spreads risk if one location is disrupted |
| + | Long payments and banking track record with UK and European institutions |
| - | Headcount dropped about 5% in the year to June 2025 as demand softened |
| - | Smaller projects can get less senior attention than flagship accounts |
| - | Day rates are higher than those of smaller Central European vendors |
| Box UK | |
|---|---|
| + | Cardiff rates are lower than London consultancies |
| + | Senior people stay close to projects in a small team |
| + | Good experience with content-heavy web platforms |
| - | Small team cannot staff large programmes |
| - | No offshore option, so costs stay at UK levels |
Who should choose Endava?
A typical fit: a UK bank needs 50+ engineers for a multi-year core platform programme.
UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Payments, Retail, Media and telecoms, Healthcare.
Who should choose Box UK?
A typical fit: a manufacturer needs a B2B e-commerce platform.
Small Welsh team with long-standing enterprise web clients. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Retail, Media, Manufacturing, Healthcare.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Box UK
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Box UK |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs Box UK (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Endava |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Neither lists team extension; ask about dedicated teams |
| Your product includes hardware, firmware or connected devices | Neither; consider an embedded specialist |
Use case fit: Endava vs Box UK
| Use case | Endava fit | Box UK fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A UK bank needs 50+ engineers for a multi-year core platform programme. | Strong | Limited | Endava |
| A payments company wants a managed service covering development, testing and support. | Strong | Limited | Endava |
| A manufacturer needs a B2B e-commerce platform. | Limited | Strong | Box UK |
| A publisher wants a new content platform. | Limited | Strong | Box UK |
| 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 | Limited | Strong | Box UK |
Verdict: Endava vs Box UK
Endava (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Development Outsourcing projects. UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations.
Box UK (3.8/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a publisher wants a new content platform. If your situation matches that, Box UK is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Box UK FAQ
Is Endava better than Box UK?
Endava (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Endava's strongest advantage: public-company reporting gives buyers audited figures on headcount, revenue and client concentration. Box UK's strongest advantage: cardiff rates are lower than London consultancies.
How do Endava and Box UK differ in pricing?
Endava uses time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts pricing. Box UK uses fixed price, time and materials, retainer pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or Box UK?
Box UK 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 Box UK?
Endava's primary differentiator is: UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations. Box UK's primary differentiator is: small Welsh team with long-standing enterprise web clients. They also differ in team size (10,000+ vs 50–100), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Payments vs Retail, Media).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.