EPAM Systems vs Globant: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
EPAM Systems (4.1/5) edges ahead of Globant (4.1/5) overall. EPAM Systems is the better choice for enterprises with multi-year engineering budgets. Globant is the stronger option for buyers wanting subscription pricing on AI delivery. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
EPAM Systems vs Globant: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | EPAM Systems | Globant |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1993 | 2003 |
| HQ | Newtown, PA, USA | Luxembourg (founded in Buenos Aires) |
| Team size | 61,000+ | 28,500+ |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Engineering capacity across Europe, India, and the Americas for long AI programs | AI Pods priced by output or consumption instead of hours |
| Pricing model | Time & materials and dedicated teams; rates on request | Subscription AI Pods, time & materials, and managed services; rates on request |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | Azure OpenAI, AWS Bedrock, Databricks | Azure OpenAI, AWS Bedrock, Salesforce |
| Industries served | Financial services, Healthcare, Retail & e-commerce, Media, Energy | Media, Retail & e-commerce, Financial services, Healthcare |
EPAM Systems vs Globant: overview
EPAM Systems
EPAM Systems was founded in 1993 and is headquartered in Newtown, Pennsylvania, with over 61,200 employees at the end of 2025. Acquisitions shaped the recent mix: NEORIS (2024) for Latin America and Iberia, and First Derivative (completed December 2024) for financial-services data. Management targets more than $600 million of AI-native revenue in 2026, after reporting over $105 million in Q4 2025. Its AI/Run tooling and Agentic QA product support large engineering programs more than single-workflow pilots.
Globant
Globant was founded in Buenos Aires in 2003, is now legally headquartered in Luxembourg, and employs more than 28,500 people in over 30 countries. Its notable pricing change is the AI Pods model: clients subscribe to AI-assisted delivery units and pay for output or consumption rather than staff hours. Glob.AI annual recurring revenue reached $52.8 million in Q2 2026. The company cut its 2026 revenue forecast that quarter, citing slower North American decisions.
Services and capabilities: EPAM Systems vs Globant
| Capability | EPAM Systems | Globant |
|---|---|---|
| CRM / ERP integration | ✓ | ✗ |
| LLM API gateway & cost control | ✓ | ✗ |
| Document processing | ✗ | ✗ |
| Conversational AI | ✗ | ✓ |
| Agentic workflows | ✓ | ✓ |
| Fixed-price pilot | ✗ | ✗ |
| Managed services after launch | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: EPAM Systems vs Globant
| Framework / platform | EPAM Systems | Globant |
|---|---|---|
| Salesforce | N/A | ✓ |
| SAP | ✓ | N/A |
| Microsoft Dynamics 365 | N/A | N/A |
| HubSpot | N/A | N/A |
| Snowflake | ✓ | ✓ |
| Databricks | ✓ | N/A |
| BigQuery | N/A | N/A |
| Azure OpenAI | ✓ | ✓ |
| AWS Bedrock | ✓ | ✓ |
| Zendesk | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: EPAM Systems vs Globant
| Criterion | EPAM Systems | Globant |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Time & materials, Dedicated team, Managed services | Time & materials, Managed services, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: EPAM Systems vs Globant
| Dimension | EPAM Systems | Globant |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Enterprise | Enterprise |
| Best industries | Financial services, Healthcare, Retail & e-commerce | Media, Retail & e-commerce, Financial services |
| Best use cases | Large data-platform programs that end in AI features, Agent development across several business units | Ongoing AI feature delivery on a monthly subscription, Customer-experience agents for media and retail brands |
| Typical project type | Time & materials | Time & materials |
EPAM Systems vs Globant: pros and cons
| EPAM Systems | |
|---|---|
| + | Engineering depth to staff many workstreams at once. |
| + | Public reporting on AI-native revenue gives a measurable view of the practice. |
| + | First Derivative added capital-markets data skills. |
| + | Agentic QA product addresses testing of AI-generated code. |
| - | Acquisition-driven growth (NEORIS, First Derivative) means teams are still being integrated |
| - | Not built for a small fixed-price pilot |
| - | Management flagged slower organic growth in 2026 guidance |
| Globant | |
|---|---|
| + | Subscription pricing changes the cost conversation away from hourly rates. |
| + | Large nearshore bench in Latin America with U.S. time-zone overlap. |
| + | Strong media and entertainment portfolio. |
| + | Public reporting on Glob.AI revenue. |
| - | Lowered 2026 revenue guidance signals pressure on the business |
| - | Subscription pods are new, with limited public results to judge |
| - | Too large a commitment for a single-system integration |
Who should choose EPAM Systems?
A typical fit: large data-platform programs that end in AI features.
Engineering capacity across Europe, India, and the Americas for long AI programs. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Healthcare, Retail & e-commerce, Media, Energy.
Who should choose Globant?
A typical fit: ongoing AI feature delivery on a monthly subscription.
AI Pods priced by output or consumption instead of hours. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Media, Retail & e-commerce, Financial services, Healthcare.
Decision matrix: EPAM Systems vs Globant
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You want a priced pilot before committing to a rollout | Neither advertises one; ask for a scoped pilot quote |
| You need someone to run and monitor the system after launch | Both offer managed services |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: EPAM Systems (Not disclosed) vs Globant (Not disclosed) |
| The AI has to read and write in your CRM or ERP | EPAM Systems |
| You need multi-step agents acting across systems | Both build agentic workflows |
| You need a large team for a multi-year program | EPAM Systems |
Use case fit: EPAM Systems vs Globant
| Use case | EPAM Systems fit | Globant fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Large data-platform programs that end in AI features | Strong | Limited | EPAM Systems |
| Agent development across several business units | Strong | Limited | EPAM Systems |
| Ongoing AI feature delivery on a monthly subscription | Limited | Strong | Globant |
| Customer-experience agents for media and retail brands | Limited | Strong | Globant |
Verdict: EPAM Systems vs Globant
EPAM Systems (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Integration Services projects. Engineering capacity across Europe, India, and the Americas for long AI programs.
Globant (4.1/5) is worth a look if you need customer-experience agents for media and retail brands. If your situation matches that, Globant is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
EPAM Systems vs Globant FAQ
Is EPAM Systems better than Globant?
EPAM Systems (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. EPAM Systems's strongest advantage: engineering depth to staff many workstreams at once. Globant's strongest advantage: subscription pricing changes the cost conversation away from hourly rates.
How do EPAM Systems and Globant differ in pricing?
EPAM Systems's pricing: time & materials and dedicated teams; rates on request. Globant's pricing: subscription AI Pods, time & materials, and managed services; rates on request. Any hourly bands shown come from Clutch, not a published rate card, so a scoping call is still needed for a project quote.
Which is better for enterprise: EPAM Systems or Globant?
EPAM Systems is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each provider before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between EPAM Systems and Globant?
EPAM Systems's primary differentiator is: engineering capacity across Europe, India, and the Americas for long AI programs. Globant's primary differentiator is: AI Pods priced by output or consumption instead of hours. They also differ in team size (61,000+ vs 28,500+), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Financial services, Healthcare vs Media, Retail & e-commerce).
Verify all details directly with each provider before making a decision.