Agency Comparison
Faculty AI vs WeAreBrain
Comparing AI Consulting options: London vs Amsterdam.
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 | Faculty AI | WeAreBrain |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | Higher score: 73.3/100 | 47.3/100 |
| Hourly rate | Contact for rates | Contact for rates |
| Team size | ||
| Location | London, United Kingdom | Amsterdam, Netherlands |
| Founded | 2014 | 2015 |
| Last reviewed | Aug 4, 2026 | More recent review: Aug 6, 2026 |
What we said about each
Our take on Faculty AI
Published case studies show systems that survived scrutiny most agencies never face—the NHS AI Lab's model-validation process for clinical AI, deployed generative-AI tooling inside Tide's support operation, and an LLM-backed recommender that now sources 25% of Axiom Law's hires. The published work index spans defense, energy, insurance, and government, though many entries are anonymized or brief. Rates are not published and the engagement profile is institutional—expect procurement-grade…
Reviewed Aug 4, 2026
Read the full assessment →Our take on WeAreBrain
The Pulsr engagement is the clearest AI evidence: a verified AI implementation at a Dutch law firm that halved research time, letting lawyers move capacity from document analysis to client work. Behind it sit two HEINEKEN builds. Receipt validation for the Rewards campaigns combined OCR, image recognition and a matching algorithm to read 30,000-plus receipts across three campaigns, about 80% of them correctly without a human and internal handling costs down by over 90%.
Reviewed Aug 6, 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 Faculty AI if you need
- disclosed specialization in Public Sector / Healthcare
- broader service offering — also covers AI Automation and Generative AI
- a higher overall editorial score
Choose WeAreBrain if you need
- disclosed specialization in E-commerce
- an overall editorial score of 47.3/100
Strengths and watch-outs
Both upsides and risks, straight from our editorial assessments.
Faculty AI
Strengths
- Published 10% ticket-handling-time reduction at Tide, with the deployed tools named (AgentAssist, MemberSummarise on Amazon Bedrock)
- Applied AI since 2014 with an in-house fellowship talent pipeline—delivery here predates the LLM wave
- NHS England's deputy director of AI is quoted crediting the validation work in the published study
Watch-outs
- Much of the work index is anonymized (military, challenger bank)—ask for a speakable reference in your sector
- No published rates; budget for institutional procurement timelines
WeAreBrain
Strengths
- Published outcomes in two settings: research time halved at a law firm, handling costs down over 90% at HEINEKEN
- A decade of product engineering behind the AI practice, so the delivery discipline predates the positioning
- Publishes honestly on when not to build an agent, which is a useful signal about how they scope
Watch-outs
- Three documented AI builds across two clients—ask what else has shipped and in what technique
- Much of the published portfolio is non-AI product work; confirm the AI team is who you would get
Service coverage
Where the two overlap, and where each covers ground the other does not.
Only Faculty AI
Only WeAreBrain
None.
Industry coverage
Where the two overlap, and where each covers ground the other does not.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has more Legal experience, Faculty AI or WeAreBrain?
- Both agencies show documented Legal work. Faculty AI has the broader industry stack overall, with disclosed experience in Public Sector, Healthcare, FinTech beyond their shared focus.
- Which scores higher overall, Faculty AI or WeAreBrain?
- Faculty AI scores 73.3/100, 26 points higher than WeAreBrain at 47.3/100. Both portfolio quality and business credibility feed into the score — see our methodology for the full breakdown.
- When should I consider both Faculty AI and WeAreBrain?
- Consider running parallel discovery briefs with Faculty AI and WeAreBrain 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.