Made Tech vs Codurance: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Made Tech (4.1/5) edges ahead of Codurance (4.1/5) overall. Made Tech is the better choice for UK central and local government buyers. Codurance is the stronger option for legacy modernisation, engineering-practice improvement. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Made Tech vs Codurance: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Made Tech | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2008 | 2013 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | London, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 400–500 | 150–300 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog | Craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams |
| Pricing model | Framework call-offs, time and materials, fixed price | Time and materials, fixed price |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Ruby, Python, Java | Java, Kotlin, C# |
| Industries served | Public sector, Local government, Healthcare | Financial services, Retail, Media, Public sector |
Made Tech vs Codurance: overview
Made Tech
Made Tech was founded in London in 2008 and listed on AIM in 2021. FY25 revenue (to May 2025) rose 20% to £46.4m with a contracted backlog of £92.2m, and the company reported around 430 employees after a period of hiring. Almost all of its work is for UK central and local government, health and other regulated bodies. Contractor use rose to 19% of the workforce in FY25, and management has said it plans to bring that back toward 10%.
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: Made Tech vs Codurance
| Capability | Made Tech | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile app development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data & AI | ✓ | ✗ |
| Legacy modernisation | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Made Tech vs Codurance
| Framework / platform | Made Tech | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | N/A | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | ✓ | N/A |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Made Tech vs Codurance
| Criterion | Made Tech | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, 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: Made Tech vs Codurance
| Dimension | Made Tech | Codurance |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Public sector, Local government, Healthcare | Financial services, Retail, Media |
| Best use cases | A council wants legacy case-management systems replaced., A government department needs a discovery and alpha phase for a new service. | 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 | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Made Tech vs Codurance: pros and cons
| Made Tech | |
|---|---|
| + | Deep familiarity with GDS service standards and government frameworks |
| + | Public reporting makes financial health easy to check |
| + | A growing backlog points to sustained repeat business from government |
| - | Little private-sector experience, so commercial buyers have better options |
| - | No offshore delivery, so rates are UK onshore rates |
| - | Contractor reliance roughly doubled in FY25 |
| 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 Made Tech?
A typical fit: a council wants legacy case-management systems replaced.
Public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Public sector, Local government, 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: Made Tech vs Codurance
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Made Tech |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Made Tech (Not published) vs Codurance (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Codurance |
| 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: Made Tech vs Codurance
| Use case | Made Tech fit | Codurance fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A council wants legacy case-management systems replaced. | Strong | Limited | Made Tech |
| A government department needs a discovery and alpha phase for a new service. | Strong | Limited | Made Tech |
| 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 | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
Verdict: Made Tech vs Codurance
Made Tech (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Development Outsourcing projects. Public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog.
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
Made Tech vs Codurance FAQ
Is Made Tech better than Codurance?
Made Tech (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Made Tech's strongest advantage: deep familiarity with GDS service standards and government frameworks. Codurance's strongest advantage: strong on cleaning up legacy codebases and raising engineering standards.
How do Made Tech and Codurance differ in pricing?
Made Tech uses framework call-offs, time and materials, fixed price 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: Made Tech or Codurance?
Made Tech 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 Made Tech and Codurance?
Made Tech's primary differentiator is: public-sector-only focus with a growing contracted backlog. Codurance's primary differentiator is: craftsmanship-led delivery that also coaches in-house teams. They also differ in team size (400–500 vs 150–300), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Public sector, Local government vs Financial services, Retail).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.