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 | Artefact | dida |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | Higher score: 74.8/100 | 68/100 |
| Hourly rate | Contact for rates | €130-175/hr |
| Team size | Larger team: 1000+ | 10-49 |
| Location | Paris, France | Berlin, Germany |
| Founded | — | 2018 |
| Last reviewed | More recent review: Aug 5, 2026 | Aug 4, 2026 |
What we said about each
Our take on Artefact
The Bpifrance engagement is the one to read first. Artefact took agentic AI from experiment to scale across 500 employees at a public investment bank, and what came out of it was not one assistant but more than 1,500 individual agents built by the business teams themselves. That is a different claim from most agentic case studies, which describe a system rather than an adoption curve.
Reviewed Aug 5, 2026
Read the full assessment →Our take on dida
The Deutsche Bahn work is the most technically detailed case study on this register. dida published its approach to detecting anomalous objects on track—monocular depth estimation with a fine-tuned vision transformer, Segment Anything for masks, depth maps to rank what matters—along with before-and-after outputs and a conference talk naming the engineer who led it. The published project index runs to roughly eighteen builds across remote sensing, industrial inspection, document understanding…
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 Artefact if you need
- larger team capacity for multi-stream or enterprise-scale programs
- disclosed specialization in E-commerce / FinTech
- broader service offering — also covers AI Agents
- a higher overall editorial score
Choose dida if you need
- closer collaboration at a smaller team scale
- disclosed specialization in Public Sector / Legal
Strengths and watch-outs
Both upsides and risks, straight from our editorial assessments.
Artefact
Strengths
- Agentic AI evidenced at adoption scale rather than pilot scale: 500 employees, then more than 1,500 agents emerging from the business itself
- Outcome figures published on the cases that carry them—two minutes for a market study, 15 points of revenue-prediction accuracy, seventy airports
- Over a hundred client pages published, so a buyer can find work in their own sector rather than accepting an analogue
Watch-outs
- 2,500 people across thirty-two offices—confirm which office delivers, who is named on the team, and how much is subcontracted
- Many of the published cases carry no numbers at all; the strong ones are strong, but the portfolio is uneven on outcomes
dida
Strengths
- Publishes methods at a level that can be independently assessed—named models, datasets, and the reasoning behind rejected approaches
- Works with open datasets and open publication, including a project on Deutsche Bahn's automated-driving program
- Names the scientists on its projects and runs its own annual conference, so the bench is verifiable before you engage
Watch-outs
- Case studies describe method rather than result—ask for a deployed reference with numbers if you need one
- A 10-49 person team taking research-grade work; confirm capacity and timeline before committing to a deadline
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.
Pricing math
What a 12-week engagement at one full-time equivalent (~480hours) costs at each agency’s published rate. An arithmetic projection, not a quote — real scopes move with seniority mix and team shape.
Artefact
Contact for rates
dida
Rate: €130-175/hr
€62,400–€84,000
Only dida publishes a rate, so there is no gap to measure. Artefact quotes per engagement — ask for a rate card early, since a comparison that starts on scope and ends on price tends to end late.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has more Manufacturing experience, Artefact or dida?
- Both agencies show documented Manufacturing work and have similar industry breadth. Compare directly on the agency profiles: Artefact and dida.
- Which scores higher overall, Artefact or dida?
- Artefact scores 74.8/100, 6.8 points higher than dida at 68/100. Both portfolio quality and business credibility feed into the score — see our methodology for the full breakdown.
- Which is faster to engage, Artefact or dida?
- Neither publishes lead times, so this is a read on team size rather than a measured answer. dida runs the smaller team, which usually means fewer procurement gates and a shorter path to kickoff. Artefact 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 Artefact and dida?
- Consider running parallel discovery briefs with Artefact and dida 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.