Future Processing vs DataArt: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Future Processing (4.6/5) edges ahead of DataArt (4.0/5) overall. Future Processing is the better choice for UK insurers and financial firms, long-term nearshore teams. 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.
Future Processing vs DataArt: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Future Processing | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 1997 |
| HQ | Gliwice, Poland (London office) | New York, United States (London office) |
| Team size | 750–1,000 | 5,000–6,000 |
| Rating | 4.6 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Twenty-five years of delivery from Poland with UK-based account leadership in the City | Two decades of London presence and specialist travel-industry engineering |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, dedicated team, fixed price | Time and materials, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | .NET, Java, Azure | Java, .NET, Python |
| Industries served | Financial services, Insurance, Energy, Media, Healthcare | Travel and hospitality, Financial services, Healthcare, Media, Retail |
Future Processing vs DataArt: overview
Future Processing
Future Processing started in Gliwice, Poland in 2000 and now employs roughly 800 people, with a London office at Gracechurch Street led by a UK managing director. Directory data puts around 45% of its work in financial services, with insurance, energy, media and healthcare making up much of the rest. It sells bespoke development, cloud and data work, and consulting. Delivery happens mainly in Poland, which keeps rates in the Central European band.
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: Future Processing vs DataArt
| Capability | Future Processing | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile app development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data & AI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Legacy modernisation | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Future Processing vs DataArt
| Framework / platform | Future Processing | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | ✓ | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Future Processing vs DataArt
| Criterion | Future Processing | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Fixed project, Time and materials | Dedicated team, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Future Processing vs DataArt
| Dimension | Future Processing | DataArt |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Mid-market to enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Insurance, Energy | Travel and hospitality, Financial services, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | An insurer wants a dedicated .NET and Azure team to modernise policy administration systems., A UK fintech needs a nearshore squad to extend an in-house engineering team. | A travel company needs booking-engine and distribution work., A financial firm wants legacy trading software modernised. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
Future Processing vs DataArt: pros and cons
| Future Processing | |
|---|---|
| + | A London office with a UK managing director means escalations land with someone in your time zone |
| + | Heavy financial-services and insurance exposure suggests familiarity with UK regulated-sector procurement |
| + | Around 800 staff is large enough to grow a team quickly without the overhead of a 10,000-person vendor |
| + | Polish delivery is one hour ahead of the UK, so working days overlap almost completely |
| - | No hardware or embedded engineering capability, so connected-device products need a second supplier |
| - | Polish engineering rates have risen steadily and are now closer to Western European levels than they were a decade ago |
| - | Public pricing and minimum project sizes are not published |
| 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 Future Processing?
A typical fit: an insurer wants a dedicated .NET and Azure team to modernise policy administration systems.
Twenty-five years of delivery from Poland with UK-based account leadership in the City. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Insurance, Energy, Media, Healthcare.
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: Future Processing vs DataArt
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Future Processing |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Future Processing |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Future Processing (Not published) vs DataArt (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Future Processing |
| 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: Future Processing vs DataArt
| Use case | Future Processing fit | DataArt fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| An insurer wants a dedicated .NET and Azure team to modernise policy administration systems. | Strong | Limited | Future Processing |
| A UK fintech needs a nearshore squad to extend an in-house engineering team. | Strong | Limited | Future Processing |
| 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 | Future Processing |
Verdict: Future Processing vs DataArt
Future Processing (4.6/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Development Outsourcing projects. Twenty-five years of delivery from Poland with UK-based account leadership in the City.
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
Future Processing vs DataArt FAQ
Is Future Processing better than DataArt?
Future Processing (4.6/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Future Processing's strongest advantage: a London office with a UK managing director means escalations land with someone in your time zone. DataArt's strongest advantage: london office has been open since 2001.
How do Future Processing and DataArt differ in pricing?
Future Processing uses time and materials, dedicated team, 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: Future Processing 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 Future Processing and DataArt?
Future Processing's primary differentiator is: twenty-five years of delivery from Poland with UK-based account leadership in the City. DataArt's primary differentiator is: two decades of London presence and specialist travel-industry engineering. They also differ in team size (750–1,000 vs 5,000–6,000), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Insurance vs Travel and hospitality, Financial services).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.