# 010 Coding Collective vs Clockworks

> Two top-rated AI Automation agencies in Rotterdam. Side by side: published rates, team size, service and industry coverage, and the curator's assessment of both — pairings are never sold.

Canonical page: https://www.aiagencies.eu/compare/010-coding-collective-vs-clockworks
Generated: 2026-10-21 · Curated by Gabor Kiss · No paid placements — inclusion, score, and rank are never sold.

## Facts
| | 010 Coding Collective | Clockworks |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | 57.8/100 | 61.8/100 |
| Hourly rate | not published | not published |
| Team size | 2-9 | 10-49 |
| Location | Rotterdam, Netherlands | Rotterdam, Netherlands |
| Founded | — | 2017 |
| Last reviewed | 2026-09-04 | 2026-09-04 |
| Services | AI Automation, AI Development, AI Consulting | AI Development, AI Automation |
| Industries | FinTech, Public Sector, E-commerce | Public Sector, Manufacturing |

## Our take on 010 Coding Collective
Reviewed 2026-09-04 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

The recruitment case study is the one to read: FastAPI, LangChain, GPT-4 and PostgreSQL behind a CV-screening system that scores against stated job requirements only, refuses to train on historical hiring data, logs every decision, and passed an external audit—the compliance reasoning is written out at a level most AI shops leave to a sales deck.

The Utilitarian shoe-return tool is live in INTERSPORT and Runnersworld stores as a white-label platform on the client's AWS, and the study says plainly that no custom model was trained, which is the right call stated out loud.

Against that, the strongest study is anonymized at the client's request with every figure removed—"significant time savings" is as precise as the results get—and the team is 2-9 people.

The weaker fit is buyers who need a model built rather than assembled, or a supplier deep enough to staff two builds at once.

### Key strengths
- Data residency is specified rather than assumed: hosting is stated as AWS in the EU region against a GDPR requirement written into the brief
- Case studies name what was deliberately left out—no custom model, no over-built architecture—which makes the delivery tradeoffs legible upfront
- Published service lines include code review and security audit of AI-generated codebases, with a free 1.5-hour scoping session and a written summary before any engagement

### Good to know
- No rate is published and the team is 2-9 people—clarify capacity and pricing against the European range on our rate index before scoping a multi-month build
- Ask for a speakable reference behind the recruitment system: the audit result and the time savings are both stated without a name or a number attached
- No team page, founding year or named engineers are published—ask who specifically would build and who maintains the system after handover

## Our take on Clockworks
Reviewed 2026-09-04 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

Four published case studies, all with named Dutch clients and all computer vision in operational use: 639,000-plus valve connections mapped for Brabant Water at a stated 95% detection accuracy, meter readings captured from photos for Stedin with a 70% reduction in house visits, and crate identification for Euro Pool System's Stack & Track.

The Brabant Water system reused image data already collected by the firm's own Blicker meter-reading product rather than commissioning a fresh survey.

What the write-ups do not give you is stack detail—"Vision AI" and "trained AI models" is as specific as it gets, with no model families, accuracy methodology or monitoring described, and the NVWA inspection app is presented as a pilot rather than a rollout.

The weaker fit is buyers outside Dutch-language markets or outside image recognition: the case studies are published in Dutch only, and every one of them is a vision problem.

### Key strengths
- Blicker is the firm's own image-recognition product and two of the four studies extend it, so the vision pipeline is a repeated pattern rather than a first build
- Every case study is signed by a named AI Solutions Engineer with a role, which is rare at this size
- Clients are Dutch utilities, regulators and logistics operators—regulated, audit-sensitive buyers who published their names against the work

### Good to know
- No rate is published; anchor the conversation against the European range on our rate index before scoping
- Monitoring, retraining and accuracy-drift handling are not described in any study—if your team will operate the model after handover, ask what the maintenance arrangement is
- Team size and structure are not published—confirm who would staff your build and how many of them work on vision

## Which to choose
Choose 010 Coding Collective for:
- closer collaboration at a smaller team scale
- disclosed specialization in FinTech / E-commerce
- broader service offering — also covers AI Consulting

Choose Clockworks for:
- larger team capacity for multi-stream or enterprise-scale programs
- disclosed specialization in Manufacturing
- a higher overall editorial score

## Questions buyers ask

### Which has more Public Sector experience, 010 Coding Collective or Clockworks?
Both agencies show documented Public Sector work. 010 Coding Collective has the broader industry stack overall, with disclosed experience in FinTech, E-commerce beyond their shared focus.

### Which scores higher overall, 010 Coding Collective or Clockworks?
Clockworks scores 61.8/100, 4 points higher than 010 Coding Collective at 57.8/100. See our methodology for how scores are calculated.

### When should I consider both 010 Coding Collective and Clockworks?
Consider running parallel discovery briefs with 010 Coding Collective and Clockworks if your project spans multiple workstreams, you want competitive proposals to compare scope and approach, or you're undecided between the specialization angles each brings (see the Best for cards above). Most engagements ultimately go with one — but the parallel-brief phase is a low-cost way to validate fit.

---
Source: AIAgencies.eu — the curated register of European AI agencies. Rate provenance: "agency-confirmed" = disclosed via submission or claimed profile; "directory-listed" = Clutch or two agreeing B2B directories (lone unverified sources are never written). Full method: https://www.aiagencies.eu/methodology · Rate index: https://www.aiagencies.eu/rates