Future Processing vs Infinum: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Future Processing (4.6/5) edges ahead of Infinum (4.1/5) overall. Future Processing is the better choice for UK insurers and financial firms, long-term nearshore teams. Infinum is the stronger option for consumer apps where design quality matters. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Future Processing vs Infinum: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Future Processing | Infinum |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2005 |
| HQ | Gliwice, Poland (London office) | Zagreb, Croatia (London office) |
| Team size | 750–1,000 | 350–450 |
| Rating | 4.6 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Twenty-five years of delivery from Poland with UK-based account leadership in the City | In-house product design and mobile engineering with a strong portfolio of consumer apps |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, dedicated team, fixed price | Time and materials, fixed price |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | .NET, Java, Azure | Swift, Kotlin, Flutter |
| Industries served | Financial services, Insurance, Energy, Media, Healthcare | Financial services, Media, Healthcare, Retail |
Future Processing vs Infinum: 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.
Infinum
Infinum was founded in Zagreb, Croatia in 2005 and employs around 400 people across Zagreb, Varaždin, Ljubljana, Podgorica, Amsterdam, New York and London. Its London office opened in 2021. The company is best known for polished mobile and web products, with design and engineering kept under one roof. Croatian rates sit below the UK but above the cheapest Eastern European options.
Services and capabilities: Future Processing vs Infinum
| Capability | Future Processing | Infinum |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Infinum
| Framework / platform | Future Processing | Infinum |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | ✓ | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | N/A |
| Python | ✓ | N/A |
| React | ✓ | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | N/A |
| Azure | ✓ | N/A |
| Kubernetes | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Future Processing vs Infinum
| Criterion | Future Processing | Infinum |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Fixed project, Time and materials | Fixed project, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Future Processing vs Infinum
| Dimension | Future Processing | Infinum |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Mid-market to enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Insurance, Energy | Financial services, Media, 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 bank wants a new retail banking app designed and built., A media brand needs iOS and Android apps with a shared design system. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Fixed project |
Future Processing vs Infinum: 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 |
| Infinum | |
|---|---|
| + | Design and engineering work as one team, which helps consumer-facing products |
| + | EU-based delivery simplifies GDPR-related contract terms |
| + | A London office lets UK clients meet the team in person |
| - | Better suited to product builds than large enterprise back-office systems |
| - | Smaller than most nearshore vendors on this list, which limits team growth |
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 Infinum?
A typical fit: a bank wants a new retail banking app designed and built.
In-house product design and mobile engineering with a strong portfolio of consumer apps. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Media, Healthcare, Retail.
Decision matrix: Future Processing vs Infinum
| 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 Infinum (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 Infinum
| Use case | Future Processing fit | Infinum 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 bank wants a new retail banking app designed and built. | Limited | Strong | Infinum |
| A media brand needs iOS and Android apps with a shared design system. | Limited | Strong | Infinum |
| 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 | Strong | Both equally |
Verdict: Future Processing vs Infinum
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.
Infinum (4.1/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a media brand needs iOS and Android apps with a shared design system. If your situation matches that, Infinum is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Future Processing vs Infinum FAQ
Is Future Processing better than Infinum?
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. Infinum's strongest advantage: design and engineering work as one team, which helps consumer-facing products.
How do Future Processing and Infinum differ in pricing?
Future Processing uses time and materials, dedicated team, fixed price pricing. Infinum 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: Future Processing or Infinum?
Future Processing 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 Infinum?
Future Processing's primary differentiator is: twenty-five years of delivery from Poland with UK-based account leadership in the City. Infinum's primary differentiator is: in-house product design and mobile engineering with a strong portfolio of consumer apps. They also differ in team size (750–1,000 vs 350–450), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Insurance vs Financial services, Media).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.