# 10Clouds vs deepsense.ai

> Two top-rated AI Development agencies in Warsaw. 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/10clouds-vs-deepsense-ai
Generated: 2026-09-17 · Curated by Gabor Kiss · No paid placements — inclusion, score, and rank are never sold.

## Facts
| | 10Clouds | deepsense.ai |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | 61.8/100 | 64/100 |
| Hourly rate | €45-85/hr (directory-listed) | €85-130/hr (directory-listed) |
| Team size | 50-249 | 50-249 |
| Location | Warsaw, Poland | Warsaw, Poland |
| Founded | 2009 | 2014 |
| Last reviewed | 2026-09-03 | 2026-09-07 |
| Services | AI Agents, AI Development, Generative AI | AI Consulting, AI Development, Generative AI |
| Industries | FinTech, SaaS & B2B, Healthcare | FinTech, Manufacturing, Healthcare |

## Our take on 10Clouds
Reviewed 2026-09-03 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

The financial-services case studies are the ones to read: a live lead engine for Polfund, a credit-guarantee fund, that screens up to 5,000 public tenders a day on the firm's own AIConsole platform, and a credit-assessment redesign at an unnamed Polish bank that cut analysis time from 90 to 19 minutes per case and reports 698 analyst hours saved a month.

The stack is named throughout—Dynamics 365, Azure OpenAI, Whisper, DeepFace—and an internal AI-recruiter write-up describes what failed before what worked, which is rarer than it should be.

Two things temper the picture: the factoring sales-research tool the homepage counts among production results lists production rollout as a next step, and the PZU partnership announced in 2026 is still in testing, so the named AI work visibly in production comes down to Polfund; most of the 58 published case studies are web, mobile and design delivery from the firm's earlier life.

The weaker fit is buyers outside finance—since the April 2026 merger with 10Clouds Financial Institutions the firm says it concentrates on financial institutions and agentic commerce, so expect the domain depth to sit there.

### Key strengths
- Published rates of €45–85/h against production fintech deployments
- AIConsole is the firm's own open-source orchestration platform and appears in three of the four fintech studies, so you are buying a repeated pattern rather than a first build
- Third-party corroboration is visible: 90-plus Clutch reviews at 4.9, Deloitte Fast 50 and FT1000 listings, and a Select-tier Claude Partner Network listing

### Good to know
- The strongest metrics (79% faster analysis, 698 hours a month) belong to an anonymized bank—ask for a speakable reference behind that study
- The homepage claims 120-plus AI deployments while the site publishes about eight AI case studies—ask for the list behind the number
- Positioning since the merger is finance-only; if your brief sits in another vertical, confirm who would staff it

## Our take on deepsense.ai
Reviewed 2026-09-07 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

The published work is machine learning proper: a computer-vision system for WWF that mapped Poland's oxbow lakes using ResNet vectorization combined with location metadata, cutting a months-long manual process to hours, and a food-production quality system detecting topping defects and sauce smears at over 99% accuracy.

The team is described as 120 AI specialists doing applied research, scientific publications and open-source work alongside client delivery, with leadership named and their backgrounds published.

The pattern worth noting is naming: WWF is named, but the strongest industrial results belong to "one of the biggest foodservice companies" and "a world leader in mobile computing"—normal for enterprise machine learning, and it means your due diligence happens on a reference call rather than on the site.

Best for organizations whose problem has no obvious method—novel vision tasks, forecasting, model selection—rather than a fixed-scope automation, at a rate that reflects a research-capable bench.

### Key strengths
- Technique is named rather than implied: ResNet vectorization with location metadata on the WWF mapping, neural visual detection at over 99% accuracy on the food line
- 120 AI specialists with published research and open-source contributions alongside delivery, and named leadership with checkable backgrounds
- Founded 2014, which in this market means a decade of machine-learning delivery predating the language-model wave

### Good to know
- The strongest industrial outcomes are anonymized—ask for a speakable reference in your sector
- An LLM workshop sits among the published cases; separate the enablement engagements from the built systems when comparing
- €85–130/h is above the typical Polish band—confirm what a research-grade engagement costs against a scoped build

## Which to choose
Choose 10Clouds for:
- a more cost-effective engagement (~40% lower rate)
- disclosed specialization in SaaS & B2B
- broader service offering — also covers AI Agents

Choose deepsense.ai for:
- disclosed specialization in Manufacturing
- broader service offering — also covers AI Consulting
- a higher overall editorial score

## Questions buyers ask

### Which is cheaper, 10Clouds or deepsense.ai?
10Clouds is cheaper by roughly 40% — €65/hr median vs €108/hr at deepsense.ai. Published rates cover different things at different agencies — seniority mix, discovery and included revisions are the usual variables — so treat the gap as a question to ask, not a verdict.

### Which has more FinTech experience, 10Clouds or deepsense.ai?
Both agencies show documented FinTech work and have similar industry breadth. Compare directly on the agency profiles: 10Clouds and deepsense.ai.

### Which scores higher overall, 10Clouds or deepsense.ai?
deepsense.ai scores 64/100, 2.2 points higher than 10Clouds at 61.8/100. See our methodology for how scores are calculated.

### When should I consider both 10Clouds and deepsense.ai?
Consider running parallel discovery briefs with 10Clouds and deepsense.ai 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