Comparison updated · Newest review
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 | AVISIA | Qweri |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | Higher score: 61.8/100 | 48.8/100 |
| Hourly rate | Contact for rates | Contact for rates |
| Team size | Larger team: 250+ | 2-9 |
| Location | Lyon, France | Lyon, France |
| Founded | 2007 | 2019 |
| Last reviewed | Sep 4, 2026 | More recent review: Sep 10, 2026 |
What we said about each
Our take on AVISIA
Two named production systems, both with the stack written down. Bouygues Telecom industrialized its CRM scoring on Dataiku and reports deploying new scores seven times faster, with ten scores tracked continuously and ten alternative models tested per score. The Comutitres work automates Navigo support requests with agents built on LangChain and Anthropic Claude over AWS AgentCore, and the study frames it as the move from experimentation to production, with governance and a roadmap named as the…
Reviewed Sep 4, 2026
Read the full assessment →Our take on Qweri
The published reference list is long and specific for a practice this size, and it is measurement work: semantic SEO restructuring for the Mouratoglou Tennis Academy reported at 29% visibility growth in a year, a digital performance dashboard for the Caisse des Dépôts, an internal search audit for Cultura, tagging plans and GDPR-compliant mobile tracking for RAS Intérim. Read the machine-learning page carefully before shortlisting: what is described is feeding high-value conversion signals into…
Reviewed Sep 10, 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 AVISIA if you need
- larger team capacity for multi-stream or enterprise-scale programs
- disclosed specialization in FinTech / Healthcare
- broader service offering — also covers Generative AI
- a higher overall editorial score
Choose Qweri if you need
- closer collaboration at a smaller team scale
- disclosed specialization in SaaS & B2B
- broader service offering — also covers AI SEO
Strengths and watch-outs
Both upsides and risks, straight from our editorial assessments.
AVISIA
Strengths
- Third-party corroboration on tooling: the firm publishes a ranking as Dataiku's third partner worldwide, which is checkable against Dataiku rather than asserted alone
- Both flagship engagements name their client and describe the platform layer, so the operating model after handover is visible
- Nineteen years of continuous operation with offices in Paris, Lille, Nantes, Bordeaux and Lyon, and a data-and-AI practice that predates the generative wave
Watch-outs
- No rate is published—anchor against the European range on our rate index, and expect enterprise-consultancy pricing from a 300-person firm
- The Comutitres study reports a roadmap and governance rather than a cost or resolution-rate figure—ask for the measured outcome behind the deployment
- No ML engineers or researchers are named on the site—ask who leads the model work and whether they sit in Lyon or Paris
Qweri
Strengths
- Published entry prices with the conditions attached, so a first engagement can be scoped before a call
- Reference pages span analytics, tagging, SEO, scraping and data training, each tied to a named client rather than an industry label
- Data protection is treated as part of delivery, including a GDPR-compliant mobile tagging plan and a named data protection officer certification
Watch-outs
- No engagement published here builds or deploys a model—if you need an AI system rather than better marketing data, this is the wrong shortlist
- The site describes a team of three while the registry lists a larger band; confirm who would actually run your project
- Reference pages report visibility and delivery, rarely revenue—agree which commercial metric the work will be judged on
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 E-commerce experience, AVISIA or Qweri?
- Both agencies show documented E-commerce work. AVISIA has the broader industry stack overall, with disclosed experience in FinTech, Healthcare beyond their shared focus.
- Which scores higher overall, AVISIA or Qweri?
- AVISIA scores 61.8/100, 13 points higher than Qweri at 48.8/100. Both portfolio quality and business credibility feed into the score — see our methodology for the full breakdown.
- Which is faster to engage, AVISIA or Qweri?
- Neither publishes lead times, so this is a read on team size rather than a measured answer. Qweri runs the smaller team, which usually means fewer procurement gates and a shorter path to kickoff. AVISIA 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 AVISIA and Qweri?
- Consider running parallel discovery briefs with AVISIA and Qweri 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.