Scott Logic vs Ciklum: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Scott Logic (4.3/5) edges ahead of Ciklum (4.1/5) overall. Scott Logic is the better choice for capital markets and government, UK-only delivery required. Ciklum is the stronger option for large dedicated teams with a London contract. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Scott Logic vs Ciklum: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Scott Logic | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2005 | 2002 |
| HQ | Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom | London, United Kingdom |
| Team size | 400–500 | 3,000–4,500 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK | London headquarters with a long history of large dedicated teams in Ukraine and Central Europe |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, fixed price, capability-based | Dedicated team, time and materials, managed service |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, C#, TypeScript | Java, .NET, Python |
| Industries served | Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector, Energy | Financial services, Retail, Healthcare, Media, Travel |
Scott Logic vs Ciklum: overview
Scott Logic
Former Lehman Brothers executive Gary Scott founded Scott Logic in Newcastle in 2005. It now employs 400+ people across Newcastle, London, Edinburgh, Bristol and Leeds, all in the UK. The firm is best known for trading and capital-markets software and for central government digital work. Every engineer is UK-based, which suits security-cleared and data-sensitive projects but rules out offshore cost savings.
Ciklum
Danish entrepreneur Torben Majgaard started Ciklum in 2002 in Kyiv. It is now headquartered in London's Shoreditch and employs around 4,000 people. Its investors have included Horizon Capital, a fund associated with George Soros, and Dragon Capital, but current ownership is not publicly documented. Delivery is concentrated in Ukraine and Poland, plus the Czech Republic since its 2021 acquisition of Prague-based CN Group.
Services and capabilities: Scott Logic vs Ciklum
| Capability | Scott Logic | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile app development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Data & AI | ✓ | ✓ |
| Legacy modernisation | ✗ | ✗ |
| Embedded & IoT | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✓ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Scott Logic vs Ciklum
| Framework / platform | Scott Logic | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | N/A | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | N/A | ✓ |
| React | ✓ | ✓ |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Scott Logic vs Ciklum
| Criterion | Scott Logic | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Time and materials | Dedicated team, Managed service, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Scott Logic vs Ciklum
| Dimension | Scott Logic | Ciklum |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector | Financial services, Retail, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | An investment bank needs a trading front end rebuilt by a UK-cleared team., A government department needs a digital service built to GDS standards. | A retailer needs a 30-person e-commerce team., A healthcare firm wants a managed QA and testing service. |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Dedicated team |
Scott Logic vs Ciklum: pros and cons
| Scott Logic | |
|---|---|
| + | UK-only staffing makes security clearance and data-residency requirements straightforward |
| + | Rare depth in trading platforms and low-latency financial software |
| + | Regional offices outside London keep rates below the big London consultancies |
| - | No nearshore or offshore delivery, so rates are UK onshore rates for every role |
| - | Narrower industry spread than generalist outsourcing vendors |
| Ciklum | |
|---|---|
| + | London HQ makes contracting simple for UK buyers |
| + | Twenty years of experience running large remote teams |
| + | Several delivery countries spread location risk |
| - | Ownership has changed hands between investors several times, and the current cap table is not public |
| - | A large Ukrainian workforce means continuity plans need review |
| - | Mid-sized clients may find the sales process heavy |
Who should choose Scott Logic?
A typical fit: an investment bank needs a trading front end rebuilt by a UK-cleared team.
Trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector, Energy.
Who should choose Ciklum?
A typical fit: a retailer needs a 30-person e-commerce team.
London headquarters with a long history of large dedicated teams in Ukraine and Central Europe. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Retail, Healthcare, Media, Travel.
Decision matrix: Scott Logic vs Ciklum
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Scott Logic |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Ciklum |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Scott Logic (Not published) vs Ciklum (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Ciklum |
| 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: Scott Logic vs Ciklum
| Use case | Scott Logic fit | Ciklum fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| An investment bank needs a trading front end rebuilt by a UK-cleared team. | Strong | Limited | Scott Logic |
| A government department needs a digital service built to GDS standards. | Strong | Limited | Scott Logic |
| A retailer needs a 30-person e-commerce team. | Limited | Strong | Ciklum |
| A healthcare firm wants a managed QA and testing service. | Limited | Strong | Ciklum |
| 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 | Scott Logic |
Verdict: Scott Logic vs Ciklum
Scott Logic (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Software Development Outsourcing projects. Trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK.
Ciklum (4.1/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a healthcare firm wants a managed QA and testing service. If your situation matches that, Ciklum is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Scott Logic vs Ciklum FAQ
Is Scott Logic better than Ciklum?
Scott Logic (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Scott Logic's strongest advantage: UK-only staffing makes security clearance and data-residency requirements straightforward. Ciklum's strongest advantage: london HQ makes contracting simple for UK buyers.
How do Scott Logic and Ciklum differ in pricing?
Scott Logic uses time and materials, fixed price, capability-based pricing. Ciklum uses dedicated team, time and materials, managed service pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Scott Logic or Ciklum?
Ciklum 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 Scott Logic and Ciklum?
Scott Logic's primary differentiator is: trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK. Ciklum's primary differentiator is: london headquarters with a long history of large dedicated teams in Ukraine and Central Europe. They also differ in team size (400–500 vs 3,000–4,500), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Capital markets vs Financial services, Retail).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.