Endava vs Hippo Digital: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Endava (4.5/5) edges ahead of Hippo Digital (3.9/5) overall. Endava is the better choice for large UK programmes, payments and banking, nearshore at volume. Hippo Digital is the stronger option for public bodies wanting user-centred service design. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs Hippo Digital: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | Hippo Digital |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2016 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | Leeds, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 10,000+ | 400–500 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations | User research and service design led delivery for UK public services |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts | Framework call-offs, time and materials |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | Java, Python, TypeScript |
| Industries served | Financial services, Payments, Retail, Media and telecoms, Healthcare | Public sector, Healthcare, Housing, Education |
Endava vs Hippo Digital: 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.
Hippo Digital
Hippo Digital launched in Leeds in 2016, founded by Adam Lewis with co-founders including Robert Coop. Its early years were shaped by the DWP and Government Digital Service academies, and several academy graduates joined the firm. It employs around 400 people, with work centred on user research, service design and agile delivery for government and health.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs Hippo Digital
| Capability | Endava | Hippo Digital |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Hippo Digital
| Framework / platform | Endava | Hippo Digital |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs Hippo Digital
| Criterion | Endava | Hippo Digital |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Managed service, Time and materials | Fixed project, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs Hippo Digital
| Dimension | Endava | Hippo Digital |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Payments, Retail | Public sector, Healthcare, Housing |
| 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 council needs a citizen-facing service redesigned., A health body wants user research before a rebuild. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Endava vs Hippo Digital: 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 |
| Hippo Digital | |
|---|---|
| + | Strong user research and service design capability |
| + | Northern base keeps rates below London |
| + | Familiar with GDS assessments |
| - | Limited private-sector track record |
| - | No nearshore delivery, so there's no cost advantage |
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 Hippo Digital?
A typical fit: a council needs a citizen-facing service redesigned.
User research and service design led delivery for UK public services. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Public sector, Healthcare, Housing, Education.
Decision matrix: Endava vs Hippo Digital
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Hippo Digital |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs Hippo Digital (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 Hippo Digital
| Use case | Endava fit | Hippo Digital 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 council needs a citizen-facing service redesigned. | Limited | Strong | Hippo Digital |
| A health body wants user research before a rebuild. | Limited | Strong | Hippo Digital |
| 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 | Hippo Digital |
Verdict: Endava vs Hippo Digital
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.
Hippo Digital (3.9/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a health body wants user research before a rebuild. If your situation matches that, Hippo Digital is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs Hippo Digital FAQ
Is Endava better than Hippo Digital?
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. Hippo Digital's strongest advantage: strong user research and service design capability.
How do Endava and Hippo Digital differ in pricing?
Endava uses time and materials, managed service, outcome-based contracts pricing. Hippo Digital uses framework call-offs, time and materials pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or Hippo Digital?
Hippo Digital 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 Hippo Digital?
Endava's primary differentiator is: UK headquarters and governance with more than 10,000 engineers in lower-cost nearshore locations. Hippo Digital's primary differentiator is: user research and service design led delivery for UK public services. They also differ in team size (10,000+ vs 400–500), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Payments vs Public sector, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.