Cyber-Duck vs UXDA: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
UXDA (4.3/5) edges ahead of Cyber-Duck (3.7/5) overall. UXDA is the better choice for banks and fintech, exclusively financial-services UX. 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 UXDA: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Cyber-Duck | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2005 | 2015 |
| HQ | Elstree, Hertfordshire, UK | Riga, Latvia |
| Team size | 90+ | 25+ |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 4.3 / 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 | The only company in this list exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries |
| Pricing model | Project-based (not published) | Fixed project, retainer |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Sketch, React | Figma, Sketch, Design systems/Storybook |
| Industries served | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, Enterprise transformation | Financial services / fintech |
Cyber-Duck vs UXDA: 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.
UXDA
Alex Kreger and co-founder Linda launched UXDA (Financial UX Design) in 2015, keeping the team deliberately small — 25+ multidisciplinary specialists in Riga, Latvia. A decade later, that narrow focus has produced 150+ banking and fintech digital platforms defined or governed across 39 countries. UXDA doesn't do branding or consumer-product work; every engagement is financial-services UX, making it the clearest single-vertical fintech specialist in this list.
Services and capabilities: Cyber-Duck vs UXDA
| Capability | Cyber-Duck | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Cyber-Duck vs UXDA
| Framework / platform | Cyber-Duck | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | ✓ | N/A |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | ✓ |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Cyber-Duck vs UXDA
| Criterion | Cyber-Duck | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Cyber-Duck vs UXDA
| Dimension | Cyber-Duck | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, Enterprise transformation | Financial services / fintech |
| Best use cases | Government or public-sector digital service UX, Regulated-industry (banking, healthcare charity) product design | Bank digital platform redesign, Fintech app UX for a regulated market |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Cyber-Duck vs UXDA: 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 |
| UXDA | |
|---|---|
| + | Exclusive financial-services focus gives it domain expertise generalist companies simply can't match |
| + | 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries over a decade |
| + | Small, senior 25+ team keeps client relationships direct rather than layered through account management |
| + | A decade of continuous, single-vertical operation compounds domain knowledge over time |
| - | The exclusive fintech focus is a real limitation for any client outside financial services |
| - | $30K minimum engagement (per company website; independently unverifiable) runs higher than most 25-person boutiques |
| - | Small team size (25+) caps capacity for very large, multi-workstream programs |
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 UXDA?
A typical fit: bank digital platform redesign.
The only company in this list exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries. Minimum engagement starts at $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech.
Decision matrix: Cyber-Duck vs UXDA
| 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 | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Cyber-Duck (Not published) vs UXDA ($30K (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Cyber-Duck |
| 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 UXDA
| Use case | Cyber-Duck fit | UXDA fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Government or public-sector digital service UX | Strong | Limited | Cyber-Duck |
| Regulated-industry (banking, healthcare charity) product design | Strong | Limited | Cyber-Duck |
| Bank digital platform redesign | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fintech app UX for a regulated market | Limited | Strong | UXDA |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Cyber-Duck vs UXDA
UXDA (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. The only company in this list exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries.
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 UXDA FAQ
Is Cyber-Duck better than UXDA?
UXDA (4.3/5) 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. UXDA's strongest advantage: exclusive financial-services focus gives it domain expertise generalist companies simply can't match.
How do Cyber-Duck and UXDA differ in pricing?
Cyber-Duck uses project-based (not published) pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. UXDA uses fixed project, retainer pricing with a minimum engagement of $30K (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 UXDA?
Cyber-Duck 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 UXDA?
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. UXDA's primary differentiator is: the only company in this list exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries. They also differ in team size (90+ vs 25+), minimum engagement (Not published vs $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (Financial services / fintech, Healthcare vs Financial services / fintech).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.