Agency Comparison
Alexander Thamm vs Motius
Two top-rated AI Consulting agencies in Munich.
Comparison updated August 2026
Side by side
Published data on both agencies. Where one side measurably differs, the dot marks it: the higher score, the lower published rate, the larger team, the more recent review. Which of those is an advantage depends on your brief.
| Attribute | Alexander Thamm | Motius |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | 51.3/100 | 51.3/100 |
| Hourly rate | Contact for rates | Contact for rates |
| Team size | ||
| Location | Munich, Germany | Munich, Germany |
| Founded | 2012 | — |
| Last reviewed | Aug 4, 2026 | Aug 4, 2026 |
What we said about each
Our take on Alexander Thamm
The largest AI consultancy on this register by some distance—over 500 staff across six German offices since 2012—and the published case studies match that scale: a multi-agent system for production and delivery prioritization reporting a 5% gain in delivery reliability, automated financial forecasting, laboratory knowledge management. Every one of those studies is anonymized. Volkswagen, Porsche, Deutsche Bahn and BVG appear on the client list, but none is attached to a piece of published work.
Reviewed Aug 4, 2026
Read the full assessment →Our take on Motius
Two named-client engagements carry real computer vision: automatic engine-component detection for MTU Aero Engines, and design optimization for Optimale GmbH's sheet-metal production. BMW and Siemens appear on the client list alongside them. The practice describes itself as product and technology innovation rather than AI consulting, and the portfolio reflects that—robotics, prototyping and production automation sit beside the machine-learning work.
Reviewed Aug 4, 2026
Read the full assessment →Best for
Where each agency measurably leads on the published data — team capacity, declared specializations, editorial scoring, and rates where both publish them. Use these to match an agency to your project priorities.
Choose Alexander Thamm if you need
- disclosed specialization in Public Sector
- broader service offering — also covers AI Agents
Choose Motius if you need
- an overall editorial score of 51.3/100
Strengths and watch-outs
Both upsides and risks, straight from our editorial assessments.
Alexander Thamm
Strengths
- Scale that is independently checkable—500+ staff, six offices, operating since 2012
- Publishes an outcome figure where most anonymized studies publish none (5% delivery-reliability gain)
- Maintains its own agent framework rather than assembling one per project
Watch-outs
- No case study names its client—ask for a reference in your industry you can actually speak to
- At this size the team that pitches is rarely the team that builds; ask who staffs the work
Motius
Strengths
- Named industrial clients at genuine scale—MTU Aero Engines and BMW are not easy logos to acquire
- Computer vision applied to physical manufacturing problems rather than screens and documents
- R&D framing is honest about what the engagement is: exploration first, production second
Watch-outs
- AI sits among robotics, prototyping and UX rather than being the whole practice—confirm who on the team does the modeling
- No outcome figures published in either AI case study; ask MTU or Optimale what changed
Service coverage
Where the two overlap, and where each covers ground the other does not.
Industry coverage
Where the two overlap, and where each covers ground the other does not.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has more Manufacturing experience, Alexander Thamm or Motius?
- Both agencies show documented Manufacturing work. Alexander Thamm has the broader industry stack overall, with disclosed experience in Public Sector beyond their shared focus.
- Which scores higher overall, Alexander Thamm or Motius?
- Both score equally well overall (51.3/100). The deciding factor is specialization — see the editorial quotes and Strengths sections above. Full methodology.
- When should I consider both Alexander Thamm and Motius?
- Consider running parallel discovery briefs with Alexander Thamm and Motius 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.
Read the full reviews
A side-by-side is a starting point. The full assessments carry the portfolio analysis, documented engagements, and the evidence behind every strength and watch-out above.