Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Gapsy Studio (4.5/5) edges ahead of Cyber-Duck (3.7/5) overall. Gapsy Studio is the better choice for Fintech, SaaS, healthcare — perfect-rated boutique. Cyber-Duck is the stronger option for public-sector UK orgs, proven public-trust client list. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Cyber-Duck | Gapsy Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2005 | 2014 |
| HQ | Elstree, Hertfordshire, UK | Dnipro, Ukraine |
| Team size | 90+ | Collective model, size not published (500+ completed projects) |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 4.5 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A UX and development practice built on public-sector and regulated-industry trust (Bank of England, Cancer Research UK, GOV.UK), now backed by CACI | A perfect 5.0/5.0 Clutch rating across 52 reviews, backed by 13+ international awards, from a company that doesn't publish its own headcount |
| Pricing model | Project-based (not published) | Fixed project, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $10K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Sketch, React | Figma, Webflow, After Effects |
| Industries served | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, Enterprise transformation | Financial services / fintech, SaaS / B2B software, Healthcare, EdTech, E-commerce / retail |
Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio: overview
Cyber-Duck
Danny Bluestone founded Cyber-Duck in 2005 in Elstree, Hertfordshire, building a UX and software development practice that grew to 90+ staff across the UK and Europe before CACI acquired it, an ownership change worth disclosing. Client relationships include the Bank of England, Cancer Research UK, GOV.UK Verify partner CitizenSafe, the Commonwealth of Nations, Sport England, and Mitsubishi Electric — a client list skewed toward public-sector and regulated-industry work.
Gapsy Studio
Gapsy Studio describes its own history as running "since 2014" — treated here as self-reported since it isn't independently confirmed — from Dnipro, Ukraine. Rather than stating a headcount, the company calls itself a "collective of creative professionals," pointing to 500+ completed projects and a 5.0/5.0 Clutch rating across 52 reviews instead. Thirteen-plus international awards from Behance, Awwwards, FWA, CSS Winner, Titan Awards, and DesignRush back that rating, spanning fintech, SaaS, health, education, and retail work.
Services and capabilities: Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio
| Capability | Cyber-Duck | Gapsy Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✗ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✓ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio
| Framework / platform | Cyber-Duck | Gapsy Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | ✓ |
| React | ✓ | ✓ |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | ✓ |
Pricing comparison: Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio
| Criterion | Cyber-Duck | Gapsy Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $10K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio
| Dimension | Cyber-Duck | Gapsy Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, Enterprise transformation | Financial services / fintech, SaaS / B2B software, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | Government or public-sector digital service UX, Regulated-industry (banking, healthcare charity) product design | Fintech app UI/UX with brand identity work, Healthcare or EdTech product redesign |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio: pros and cons
| Cyber-Duck | |
|---|---|
| + | Client list (Bank of England, Cancer Research UK, GOV.UK Verify, Commonwealth of Nations) demonstrates genuine public-sector trust |
| + | 90+ staff across the UK and Europe supports mid-size delivery capacity |
| + | Two decades of continuous operation since 2005 |
| + | CACI acquisition provides access to a larger UK consulting and data-analytics organization |
| - | Acquired by CACI — no longer an independently owned agency, worth disclosing to prospective clients |
| - | Public-sector-heavy client list may be a less direct fit for consumer or startup-stage clients |
| - | Pricing and minimum engagement size aren't published |
| Gapsy Studio | |
|---|---|
| + | 5.0/5.0 Clutch rating across 52 public reviews — one of the highest verified scores in this list |
| + | 13+ international design awards across Behance, Awwwards, FWA, CSS Winner, Titan Awards, and DesignRush |
| + | 500+ completed projects demonstrates a substantial delivery track record |
| + | Covers five distinct industries (fintech, SaaS, health, education, retail) from one team |
| - | Doesn't publish a specific headcount, describing itself as a 'collective' — harder to gauge delivery capacity |
| - | Founding year is self-reported ('since 2014') rather than independently confirmed |
| - | Its broad five-industry positioning trades off some depth against single-vertical specialists like UXDA |
Who should choose Cyber-Duck?
A typical fit: government or public-sector digital service UX.
A UX and development practice built on public-sector and regulated-industry trust (Bank of England, Cancer Research UK, GOV.UK), now backed by CACI. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, Enterprise transformation.
Who should choose Gapsy Studio?
A typical fit: fintech app UI/UX with brand identity work.
A perfect 5.0/5.0 Clutch rating across 52 reviews, backed by 13+ international awards, from a company that doesn't publish its own headcount. Minimum engagement starts at $10K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech, SaaS / B2B software, Healthcare, EdTech, E-commerce / retail.
Decision matrix: Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Cyber-Duck |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Gapsy Studio |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Cyber-Duck (Not published) vs Gapsy Studio ($10K (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Gapsy Studio |
| 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: Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio
| Use case | Cyber-Duck fit | Gapsy Studio fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Government or public-sector digital service UX | Strong | Limited | Cyber-Duck |
| Regulated-industry (banking, healthcare charity) product design | Strong | Limited | Cyber-Duck |
| Fintech app UI/UX with brand identity work | Limited | Strong | Gapsy Studio |
| Healthcare or EdTech product redesign | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio
Gapsy Studio (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A perfect 5.0/5.0 Clutch rating across 52 reviews, backed by 13+ international awards, from a company that doesn't publish its own headcount.
Cyber-Duck (3.7/5) is worth a look if you need regulated-industry (banking, healthcare charity) product design. If your situation matches that, Cyber-Duck is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Cyber-Duck vs Gapsy Studio FAQ
Is Cyber-Duck better than Gapsy Studio?
Gapsy Studio (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Cyber-Duck's strongest advantage: client list (Bank of England, Cancer Research UK, GOV.UK Verify, Commonwealth of Nations) demonstrates genuine public-sector trust. Gapsy Studio's strongest advantage: 5.0/5.0 Clutch rating across 52 public reviews — one of the highest verified scores in this list.
How do Cyber-Duck and Gapsy Studio differ in pricing?
Cyber-Duck uses project-based (not published) pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Gapsy Studio uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of $10K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Cyber-Duck or Gapsy Studio?
Gapsy Studio 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 Cyber-Duck and Gapsy Studio?
Cyber-Duck's primary differentiator is: a UX and development practice built on public-sector and regulated-industry trust (Bank of England, Cancer Research UK, GOV.UK), now backed by CACI. Gapsy Studio's primary differentiator is: a perfect 5.0/5.0 Clutch rating across 52 reviews, backed by 13+ international awards, from a company that doesn't publish its own headcount. They also differ in team size (90+ vs Collective model, size not published (500+ completed projects)), minimum engagement (Not published vs $10K (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (Financial services / fintech, Healthcare vs Financial services / fintech, SaaS / B2B software).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.