Endava vs GlobalLogic: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
GlobalLogic (4.2/5) edges ahead of Endava (4.1/5) overall. GlobalLogic is the better choice for automotive and industrial clients wanting conglomerate-backed digital engineering. Endava is the stronger option for payments and financial-services enterprises wanting mid-tier CEE delivery scale. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Endava vs GlobalLogic: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Endava | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2000 | 2000 |
| HQ | London, United Kingdom | Santa Clara, California, USA (owned by Hitachi; major Ukraine delivery centers in Kyiv, Kharkiv, Lviv, and Mykolaiv) |
| Team size | 11,300+ | 5,700+ in Ukraine (larger global headcount) |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms | Hitachi's industrial client relationships behind a large Ukraine-rooted engineering workforce |
| Pricing model | Dedicated-team and consulting engagements | Enterprise dedicated-team engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Java, .NET, AWS | Java, C++, AWS |
| Industries served | Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail | Automotive, Healthcare, Media & entertainment |
Endava vs GlobalLogic: overview
Endava
Endava was founded in 2000 and is headquartered in London, with roughly 11,300 employees delivering outsourced software development and IT consulting primarily through Central and Eastern European delivery centers. Listed on the New York Stock Exchange, it occupies a mid-tier scale below the true mega-giants but well above most boutique firms, with named practices in payments, banking, and insurance technology. Its CEE-anchored delivery model puts it in similar territory to EPAM, though at roughly a fifth of EPAM's global headcount.
GlobalLogic
GlobalLogic was founded in Santa Clara, California in 2000 and acquired by Hitachi in 2021, folding its roughly 5,700-person Ukraine-based engineering workforce, out of a larger global headcount, into a Japanese industrial conglomerate's supply chain. That Hitachi ownership gives it access to industrial and automotive client relationships an independent firm would take years to build, at the cost of the founder-led accountability some buyers specifically want. It competes for the same enterprise digital-engineering contracts as SoftServe and EPAM, at a similar scale.
Services and capabilities: Endava vs GlobalLogic
| Capability | Endava | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Enterprise modernization | ✗ | ✓ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| AI/ML development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: Endava vs GlobalLogic
| Framework / platform | Endava | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | N/A | ✓ |
| SAP | N/A | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Endava vs GlobalLogic
| Criterion | Endava | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Consulting, Fixed project | Dedicated team, Consulting |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Endava vs GlobalLogic
| Dimension | Endava | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Payments, Banking, Insurance | Automotive, Healthcare, Media & entertainment |
| Best use cases | A payments or banking enterprise wanting a publicly listed, CEE-delivered vendor., A buyer wanting mid-tier scale without mega-giant account layers. | An automotive or industrial client wanting Hitachi's supply-chain relationships behind its engineering partner., An enterprise needing engineering capacity across four Ukrainian cities at once. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Dedicated team |
Endava vs GlobalLogic: pros and cons
| Endava | |
|---|---|
| + | Publicly listed on the NYSE, giving financial transparency at a mid-tier scale. |
| + | Named payments, banking, and insurance technology practices. |
| + | Central and Eastern European delivery model with more than two decades of history. |
| - | Much smaller global delivery capacity than the true mega-giants for the largest programs |
| - | Less geographic diversity than firms with delivery centers across multiple continents |
| GlobalLogic | |
|---|---|
| + | Hitachi ownership brings industrial and automotive client relationships at conglomerate scale. |
| + | Large single Ukraine-based engineering workforce across four delivery cities. |
| + | Established digital-engineering practice comparable in scale to SoftServe and EPAM. |
| - | Corporate structure under a large conglomerate means less direct founder-level access |
| - | Legal headquarters and ownership are not Ukrainian, despite the Ukraine-heavy delivery workforce |
Who should choose Endava?
A typical fit: a payments or banking enterprise wanting a publicly listed, CEE-delivered vendor.
A publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Payments, Banking, Insurance, Retail.
Who should choose GlobalLogic?
A typical fit: an automotive or industrial client wanting Hitachi's supply-chain relationships behind its engineering partner.
Hitachi's industrial client relationships behind a large Ukraine-rooted engineering workforce. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Automotive, Healthcare, Media & entertainment.
Decision matrix: Endava vs GlobalLogic
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Endava |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Endava |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Endava (Not published) vs GlobalLogic (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Endava |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: Endava vs GlobalLogic
| Use case | Endava fit | GlobalLogic fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A payments or banking enterprise wanting a publicly listed, CEE-delivered vendor. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A buyer wanting mid-tier scale without mega-giant account layers. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| An automotive or industrial client wanting Hitachi's supply-chain relationships behind its engineering partner. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| An enterprise needing engineering capacity across four Ukrainian cities at once. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Endava vs GlobalLogic
GlobalLogic (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IT Outsourcing projects. Hitachi's industrial client relationships behind a large Ukraine-rooted engineering workforce.
Endava (4.1/5) is worth a look if you need a buyer wanting mid-tier scale without mega-giant account layers. If your situation matches that, Endava is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Endava vs GlobalLogic FAQ
Is Endava better than GlobalLogic?
GlobalLogic (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Endava's strongest advantage: publicly listed on the NYSE, giving financial transparency at a mid-tier scale. GlobalLogic's strongest advantage: hitachi ownership brings industrial and automotive client relationships at conglomerate scale.
How do Endava and GlobalLogic differ in pricing?
Endava uses dedicated-team and consulting engagements pricing. GlobalLogic uses enterprise dedicated-team engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Endava or GlobalLogic?
Endava 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 Endava and GlobalLogic?
Endava's primary differentiator is: a publicly listed, CEE-anchored delivery model at a scale between the mega-giants and boutique firms. GlobalLogic's primary differentiator is: Hitachi's industrial client relationships behind a large Ukraine-rooted engineering workforce. They also differ in team size (11,300+ vs 5,700+ in Ukraine (larger global headcount)), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Payments, Banking vs Automotive, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.