# Alice Labs vs Found

> Comparing AI Automation options: Stockholm vs London. 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/alice-labs-vs-found
Generated: 2026-09-24 · Curated by Gabor Kiss · No paid placements — inclusion, score, and rank are never sold.

## Facts
| | Alice Labs | Found |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | 60/100 | 55/100 |
| Hourly rate | €85-130/hr (directory-listed) | €85-130/hr (directory-listed) |
| Team size | 2-9 | 50-249 |
| Location | Stockholm, Sweden | London, United Kingdom |
| Founded | 2023 | 2005 |
| Last reviewed | 2026-08-05 | 2026-09-23 |
| Services | AI Consulting, AI Automation, AI Agents, AI SEO | AI SEO, AI Marketing, AI Automation |
| Industries | E-commerce, Public Sector, SaaS & B2B | E-commerce, FinTech, SaaS & B2B |

## Our take on Alice Labs
Reviewed 2026-08-05 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

The most consistently quantified portfolio in this register, and it belongs to a firm founded in 2023.

Ljusgårda, the named client, runs a vertical farm supplying grocery stores; the SMS ordering agent built for it automates 70-80% of order calls and saves a stated 2.5 million kronor a year against an 83% cost reduction. A public-sector document process went from 60 hours to 3 minutes, freeing a claimed 6,400 to 8,000 hours annually. A media company's article rewrite engine took one page from 141 clicks to 3,091. An accounting firm went from zero to 41 top-three rankings.

Every one of those is an operational number rather than a vanity metric, which is the useful kind.

The qualification is age and attribution: one named client across five cases, two years of operating history, and no team size published. The numbers are the agency's own and none is independently verifiable. Ask for a reference call with Ljusgårda first.

### Key strengths
- Five engagements, five sets of outcome figures—no other agency on this roster publishes results this consistently
- The figures are operational: hours freed, calls automated, kronor saved, rather than impressions or engagement
- Works across automation, agents and AI search rather than one narrow service, which suits a smaller company buying its first AI project

### Good to know
- Only one of the five cases names its client—ask which sector descriptions correspond to which companies
- Founded 2023 with no published team size; confirm capacity and who would actually deliver

## Our take on Found
Reviewed 2026-09-23 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

Found's clearest AI work is a model it built: for Secret Sales, a deep neural network predicting each product's 30-day sales value, served to the client through a web app and rolled out on a small slice of budget first, credited with 28% higher ROAS than the account's other Shopping campaigns and more than £1M in incremental profit.

The other AI-tagged studies are thinner on the AI itself—1st Central's award-winning acquisition work runs on Google's pre-built audiences and lookalike modeling, and the Clermont Hotel Group project mined Instagram posts into a "hidden gems" ranking and used generative AI to draft the marketing plan.

AI search is the biggest part of the pitch, run through the in-house Luminr platform, yet no case study reports a citation or AI-answer result; the Luminr study for Taylor & Francis counts keywords analyzed and snippet opportunities found, not an outcome.

The weaker fit is buyers who want AI-search results they can check before signing, or an AI system outside marketing—every study read sits inside paid media, SEO or campaign planning.

### Key strengths
- Secret Sales documents a model built and put to work: a neural network scoring products by predicted 30-day sales value, a client web app, and a rollout that tiered bidding by predicted potential
- Client executives named with titles on the AI work—Secret Sales' founder and CEO, 1st Central's Digital & Marketing Director, Clermont's Digital Marketing Manager, Haleon's Global Search Lead
- A named Chief AI Officer on the record (BBC Radio 5 Live and Radio 4, The Drum Podcast), and a UK Search Award for Best Use of Search in B2C cited on the 1st Central study

### Good to know
- No published case study reports an AI-search outcome—ask for the citation or share-of-answer movement Luminr recorded for an existing client, with the engines and prompt set it measured
- The data and AI work is credited to sister company Braidr, whose managing director is Found's Chief AI Officer—ask which entity contracts, who builds the model and who owns it afterward
- The AI SEO page calls Found "the #1 AI search agency" with no measurement behind the ranking—treat it as marketing copy and ask for evidence from your own category

## Which to choose
Choose Alice Labs for:
- closer collaboration at a smaller team scale
- disclosed specialization in Public Sector
- broader service offering — also covers AI Consulting and AI Agents
- a higher overall editorial score

Choose Found for:
- larger team capacity for multi-stream or enterprise-scale programs
- disclosed specialization in FinTech
- broader service offering — also covers AI Marketing

## Questions buyers ask

### Which is cheaper, Alice Labs or Found?
Pricing is comparable: Alice Labs at €108/hr median vs Found at €108/hr. Choose on specialization rather than cost.

### Which has more E-commerce experience, Alice Labs or Found?
Both agencies show documented E-commerce work and have similar industry breadth. Compare directly on the agency profiles: Alice Labs and Found.

### Which scores higher overall, Alice Labs or Found?
Alice Labs scores 60/100, 5 points higher than Found at 55/100. Both portfolio quality and business credibility feed into the score — see our methodology for the full breakdown.

### Which is faster to engage, Alice Labs or Found?
Neither publishes lead times, so this is a read on team size rather than a measured answer. Alice Labs runs the smaller team, which usually means fewer procurement gates and a shorter path to kickoff. Found runs a larger one, which tends to mean more steps but more capacity to start parallel workstreams. Current kickoff availability is the number that actually decides it — ask both.

### When should I consider both Alice Labs and Found?
Consider running parallel discovery briefs with Alice Labs and Found 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