Endava vs Codurance: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.5/5) edges ahead of Codurance (4.1/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for large UK programmes, payments and banking, nearshore at volume. Codurance is the stronger option for legacy modernisation, engineering-practice improvement. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Codurance: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2013 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | London, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 10,000+ | 150–300 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations | Craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts | Time and materials, fixed price |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | Java, Kotlin, C# |
| Industries served | Financial services, Payments, Retail, Media and telecoms, Healthcare | Financial services, Retail, Media, Public sector |
Endava vs Codurance: 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.
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.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Codurance
| Capability | Endava | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Codurance
| Framework / platform | Endava | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | ✓ | N/A |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs Codurance
| Criterion | Endava | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Managed service, Time and materials | Fixed project, Team extension, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs Codurance
| Dimension | Endava | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Payments, Retail | Financial services, Retail, Media |
| 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 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. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Endava vs Codurance: 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 |
| 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 |
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 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.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Codurance
| 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 | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs Codurance (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Endava |
| 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: Endava vs Codurance
| Use case | Endava fit | Codurance 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 company needs a monolith split into services without stopping feature work. | Limited | Strong | Codurance |
| An engineering team wants to adopt test-driven development and pairing with outside help. | Limited | Strong | Codurance |
| 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 | Codurance |
Verdict: Endava vs Codurance
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.
Codurance (4.1/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: an engineering team wants to adopt test-driven development and pairing with outside help. If your situation matches that, Codurance is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Codurance FAQ
Is Endava better than Codurance?
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. Codurance's strongest advantage: strong on cleaning up legacy codebases and raising engineering standards.
How do Endava and Codurance differ in pricing?
Endava uses time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts pricing. Codurance uses time and materials, fixed price pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or Codurance?
Codurance 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 Codurance?
Endava's primary differentiator is: UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations. Codurance's primary differentiator is: craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams. They also differ in team size (10,000+ vs 150–300), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Payments vs Financial services, Retail).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.