Agency Comparison
Fast Data Science vs Twistag
Comparing AI Development options: London vs Lisbon.
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 | Fast Data Science | Twistag |
|---|---|---|
| Editorial score | 68/100 | Higher score: 73/100 |
| Hourly rate | €175-260/hr | Lower published rate: €45-85/hr |
| Team size | 2-9 | Larger team: 10-49 |
| Location | London, United Kingdom | Lisbon, Portugal |
| Founded | 2018 | 2016 |
| Last reviewed | Sep 7, 2026 | More recent review: Sep 9, 2026 |
What we said about each
Our take on Fast Data Science
The Clinical Trial Risk Tool is the strongest evidence a shop this size can offer: commissioned by the Gates Foundation, built over more than a year as an ensemble of machine-learning and rule-based models that extract sample size, phase, effect size and statistical-analysis-plan presence from protocols running to 200 pages, deployed publicly, open-sourced under MIT, and written up in Gates Open Research with a DOI. The consulting record is public-sector and pharma—the Information…
Reviewed Sep 7, 2026
Read the full assessment →Our take on Twistag
The best-documented AI portfolio on this page, and the detail is where the value is. For the manufacturer Aralab, an accounts-payable agent reads any supplier PDF with Claude while deterministic code independently recalculates every line total, unit price and tax figure against the matched purchase order: the model proposes, the validation engine verifies. It shipped in six weeks with one engineer, handles more than 2,000 invoices a month, and moved three finance people off transcription.
Reviewed Sep 9, 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 Fast Data Science if you need
- closer collaboration at a smaller team scale
- disclosed specialization in Healthcare / Public Sector
- broader service offering — also covers AI Consulting
Choose Twistag if you need
- a more cost-effective engagement (~235% lower rate)
- larger team capacity for multi-stream or enterprise-scale programs
- disclosed specialization in Manufacturing / FinTech
- broader service offering — also covers AI Agents and AI Automation
Strengths and watch-outs
Both upsides and risks, straight from our editorial assessments.
Fast Data Science
Strengths
- The Clinical Trial Risk Tool is peer-reviewed (Gates Open Res 2023, doi:10.12688/gatesopenres.14416.1), publicly deployed and MIT-licensed
- Sensitive-data constraints are handled explicitly—the ICO model was trained inside an isolated environment with no training data retained
- The client list is institutional and verifiable: Gates Foundation, WHO, NHS, ICO, Boehringer Ingelheim, Wellcome Trust
Watch-outs
- No case study publishes an outcome number—ask what changed for the client after delivery
- At €175-260/hr against a 2-9 headcount, ask who does the work and what happens when they are unavailable
- The published strength is NLP and research-grade analysis—ask for evidence before commissioning a production platform
Twistag
Strengths
- The hybrid pattern is published, not implied: the language model interprets and deterministic code independently recalculates every figure against the purchase order
- Observability ships with the system—LangFuse traces every call with prompt versions and per-invoice cost visible in real time, so the workflow cannot get quietly expensive
- Models sit behind a provider abstraction and were swapped twice on one engagement without the product changing shape
Watch-outs
- The largest engagement, the regulatory compliance platform, is anonymized—ask for a speakable reference at one of the brands running it
- The PepTalk system publishes no measured outcome by the agency's own admission; ask what the volume and turnaround figures are now
- No headcount is published against a decade of trading—ask how many engineers would be forward-deployed on your build and for how long
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 (~480 hours) costs at each agency’s published rate. An arithmetic projection, not a quote — real scopes move with seniority mix and team shape.
Fast Data Science
Rate: €175-260/hr
€84,000–€124,800
Twistag
Rate: €45-85/hr
€21,600–€40,800
At this scope the published midpoints are about €73,200 apart, with Twistag lower. Fast Data Science publishes Healthcare work that Twistag does not — that is the one difference on this page that bears on the gap. If your brief does not touch it, the gap is buying something this comparison cannot see.
Frequently asked questions
- Which is cheaper, Fast Data Science or Twistag?
- Twistag is cheaper by roughly 235% — €65/hr median vs €218/hr at Fast Data Science. Published rates cover different things at different agencies — seniority mix, discovery and included revisions are the usual variables — so treat the gap as a question to ask, not a verdict.
- Which has more SaaS & B2B experience, Fast Data Science or Twistag?
- Both agencies show documented SaaS & B2B work and have similar industry breadth. Compare directly on the agency profiles: Fast Data Science and Twistag.
- Which scores higher overall, Fast Data Science or Twistag?
- Twistag scores 73/100, 5 points higher than Fast Data Science at 68/100. See our methodology for how scores are calculated.
- When should I consider both Fast Data Science and Twistag?
- Consider running parallel discovery briefs with Fast Data Science and Twistag 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.