# B13 AI vs Blueberry Consultants

> Two top-rated AI Development agencies in Birmingham. 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/b13-ai-vs-blueberry-consultants
Generated: 2026-10-21 · Curated by Gabor Kiss · No paid placements — inclusion, score, and rank are never sold.

## Facts
| | B13 AI | Blueberry Consultants |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | 42/100 | 55/100 |
| Hourly rate | €20-40/hr (directory-listed) | €20-40/hr (directory-listed) |
| Team size | 10-49 | 10-49 |
| Location | Birmingham, United Kingdom | Birmingham, United Kingdom |
| Founded | 2010 | 1996 |
| Last reviewed | 2026-09-04 | 2026-09-04 |
| Services | AI Development, AI Consulting | AI Development, Generative AI, AI Consulting |
| Industries | Healthcare, SaaS & B2B | Healthcare, SaaS & B2B |

## Our take on B13 AI
Reviewed 2026-09-04 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

One of four published case studies involves AI: a speech-recognition tool built for Box Clever Digital's Thrive project that transcribes volunteer phone calls with isolated people and tracks sentiment through IBM Watson and AWS, which is live and helped the client win £500,000 in further funding.

The other three—an e-consent platform in Ruby and Angular, an Angular upgrade for an audio-production platform, and an Electron and Flutter video-consultation tool for Substrakt Health—are software delivery with no machine learning described.

The domain says AI; the portfolio says a competent Birmingham software house that has shipped one AI feature and names the client for it.

The weaker fit is a brief where the model is the product: nothing published shows model selection, evaluation or retraining, and delivery is priced at €20–40/h with an offshore development center in the mix, so ask who writes the code.

### Key strengths
- Sixteen years as a Birmingham entity working out of STEAMhouse, with Birmingham City University, Cezanne HR and the Royal Wolverhampton Hospital on the client wall
- €20–40/h, for buyers whose brief is a build with an AI component rather than a model program
- The Thrive study is explicit that human transcription sits behind the API as a fallback, so the reliability design is stated rather than implied

### Good to know
- The AI case study was last updated in 2024—ask for a post-2024 LLM-era engagement with a reference before treating current positioning as delivery history
- No headcount, team page or named engineers are published—confirm who staffs your project and which part sits offshore
- Healthcare and industrial research are listed as verticals, but the published health work is app delivery rather than clinical AI—clarify the regulatory experience if your brief is a medical device

## Our take on Blueberry Consultants
Reviewed 2026-09-04 by Gabor Kiss against published evidence.

The strongest evidence is not a case study but the published engineering: multi-LLM comparisons run on named hardware with token-throughput figures, speech-to-text accuracy tests, RAG document Q&A demos and a write-up on indirect prompt injection—reproducible technical work rather than the listicles this category usually publishes.

The one deployed model in the portfolio is an on-device YOLO system in a low-cost laryngoscope that flags throat abnormalities in real time, described as rescued from a failed build and taken to a commercial-grade application, though the client is not named.

The three named case studies—Dimec's pharmacy app, an NHS A&E patient-monitoring whiteboard and a workflow system for PKF Cooper Parry—predate the AI positioning and describe conventional software delivery.

The weaker fit is a buyer who wants a named-client AI reference to check: the AI work is visible as demos, tooling and one anonymized deployment, not as a portfolio.

### Key strengths
- €20–40/h from a company trading since 1996 that publishes the technical basis for its model recommendations
- In-house tooling ships rather than sits on a roadmap—an AI survey extension, a prompt assistant and an application framework, alongside a multi-model routing layer
- Named service lines address getting an AI-generated prototype to production, including code hardening and security review, which is where most vibe-coded builds fail

### Good to know
- The medical device deployment is anonymized—ask for a speakable reference behind the on-device model work before shortlisting on it
- The client-named case studies are pre-LLM software projects; ask for a delivered generative-AI engagement with dates and a contact
- No ML engineers or researchers are named on the site—confirm who builds the model layer versus who integrates it

## Which to choose
Choose B13 AI for:
- an overall editorial score of 42/100

Choose Blueberry Consultants for:
- broader service offering — also covers Generative AI
- a higher overall editorial score

## Questions buyers ask

### Which is cheaper, B13 AI or Blueberry Consultants?
Pricing is comparable: B13 AI at €30/hr median vs Blueberry Consultants at €30/hr. Choose on specialization rather than cost.

### Which has more Healthcare experience, B13 AI or Blueberry Consultants?
Both agencies show documented Healthcare work and have similar industry breadth. Compare directly on the agency profiles: B13 AI and Blueberry Consultants.

### Which scores higher overall, B13 AI or Blueberry Consultants?
Blueberry Consultants scores 55/100, 13 points higher than B13 AI at 42/100. See our methodology for how scores are calculated.

### When should I consider both B13 AI and Blueberry Consultants?
Consider running parallel discovery briefs with B13 AI and Blueberry Consultants 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