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 | appliedAI | Motius |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | Higher score: 64.3/100 | 51.3/100 |
| Hourly rate | Contact for rates | Contact for rates |
| Team size | ||
| Location | Munich, Germany | Munich, Germany |
| Founded | — | — |
| Last reviewed | Aug 4, 2026 | Aug 4, 2026 |
What we said about each
Our take on appliedAI
The Maschinenfabrik Reinhausen build is the one to read: a large language model on a skills-based architecture over a RAG knowledge base, in production, publishing roughly 45x faster Q&A, 1500x on automated extraction and 90% accuracy on base-analysis extraction. The published client list runs to Roche, Linde, Nokia, Vonovia and Giesecke+Devrient, and the G+D write-up tracks a named enterprise from "experimenting" to "practising" over two years rather than claiming a single win. Much of the…
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 appliedAI if you need
- disclosed specialization in Healthcare
- broader service offering — also covers AI Agents and Generative AI
- a higher overall editorial score
Choose Motius if you need
- broader service offering — also covers AI Automation
- an overall editorial score of 51.3/100
Strengths and watch-outs
Both upsides and risks, straight from our editorial assessments.
appliedAI
Strengths
- One of the few listed agencies publishing hard speedup and accuracy figures from a production system
- AI Act and governance work is a stated practice line, not a blog topic
- An agent program with a published three-month path to a production-ready agent
Watch-outs
- Several reference pages describe use cases rather than named client engagements—ask which are live deployments
- No published rates, headcount or founding year; budget for enterprise procurement
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, appliedAI or Motius?
- Both agencies show documented Manufacturing work. appliedAI has the broader industry stack overall, with disclosed experience in Healthcare beyond their shared focus.
- Which scores higher overall, appliedAI or Motius?
- appliedAI scores 64.3/100, 13 points higher than Motius at 51.3/100. Both portfolio quality and business credibility feed into the score — see our methodology for the full breakdown.
- When should I consider both appliedAI and Motius?
- Consider running parallel discovery briefs with appliedAI 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.