Scott Logic vs Version 1: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Scott Logic (4.3/5) edges ahead of Version 1 (3.9/5) overall. Scott Logic is the better choice for capital markets and government, UK-only delivery required. Version 1 is the stronger option for oracle and Microsoft estates, public-sector managed services. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Scott Logic vs Version 1: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Scott Logic | Version 1 |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2005 | 1996 |
| HQ | Newcastle upon Tyne, United Kingdom | Dublin, Ireland (UK offices including Birmingham) |
| Team size | 400–500 | 3,000+ |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK | Managed services for Oracle, Microsoft and AWS estates with Indian and Spanish delivery |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, fixed price, capability-based | Managed service, time and materials, fixed price |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, C#, TypeScript | Oracle, Microsoft Azure, AWS |
| Industries served | Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector, Energy | Public sector, Financial services, Healthcare, Utilities |
Scott Logic vs Version 1: 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.
Version 1
Version 1 was founded in Dublin in 1996 and has been majority-owned by Swiss investor Partners Group since July 2022, in a deal reported at around €800m. It had more than 3,200 staff by 2023 and opened a Birmingham hub with 500 planned jobs, plus UK acquisitions such as Automation Logic. Much of its UK work is Oracle, Microsoft and AWS managed services for public-sector bodies. Delivery comes from Ireland, the UK, Spain and India.
Services and capabilities: Scott Logic vs Version 1
| Capability | Scott Logic | Version 1 |
|---|---|---|
| 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 Version 1
| Framework / platform | Scott Logic | Version 1 |
|---|---|---|
| .NET | N/A | ✓ |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| Python | N/A | N/A |
| React | ✓ | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Scott Logic vs Version 1
| Criterion | Scott Logic | Version 1 |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Time and materials | Managed service, Fixed project, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Scott Logic vs Version 1
| Dimension | Scott Logic | Version 1 |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Capital markets, Public sector | Public sector, Financial services, 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 public body needs Oracle E-Business Suite support and migration., A utility wants Azure managed services. |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Managed service |
Scott Logic vs Version 1: 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 |
| Version 1 | |
|---|---|
| + | Strong in Oracle and Microsoft environments common in UK public bodies |
| + | Indian and Spanish delivery lower costs on managed services |
| + | Private-equity backing has funded UK expansion |
| - | Majority-owned by Partners Group since 2022, so an eventual sale or exit is likely |
| - | Product-style bespoke development is less central than managed services |
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 Version 1?
A typical fit: a public body needs Oracle E-Business Suite support and migration.
Managed services for Oracle, Microsoft and AWS estates with Indian and Spanish delivery. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Public sector, Financial services, Healthcare, Utilities.
Decision matrix: Scott Logic vs Version 1
| 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 | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Scott Logic (Not published) vs Version 1 (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Scott Logic |
| 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 Version 1
| Use case | Scott Logic fit | Version 1 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 public body needs Oracle E-Business Suite support and migration. | Limited | Strong | Version 1 |
| A utility wants Azure managed services. | Limited | Strong | Version 1 |
| 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: Scott Logic vs Version 1
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.
Version 1 (3.9/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a utility wants Azure managed services. If your situation matches that, Version 1 is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Scott Logic vs Version 1 FAQ
Is Scott Logic better than Version 1?
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. Version 1's strongest advantage: strong in Oracle and Microsoft environments common in UK public bodies.
How do Scott Logic and Version 1 differ in pricing?
Scott Logic uses time and materials, fixed price, capability-based pricing. Version 1 uses managed service, 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: Scott Logic or Version 1?
Scott Logic 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 Version 1?
Scott Logic's primary differentiator is: trading-system and capital-markets engineering from teams based entirely in the UK. Version 1's primary differentiator is: managed services for Oracle, Microsoft and AWS estates with Indian and Spanish delivery. They also differ in team size (400–500 vs 3,000+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Capital markets vs Public sector, Financial services).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.