N-iX vs Revelo: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
N-iX (4.3/5) edges ahead of Revelo (3.9/5) overall. N-iX is the better choice for enterprises scaling data and ML teams in Europe. Revelo is the stronger option for companies hiring LatAm developers without a local entity. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
N-iX vs Revelo: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | N-iX | Revelo |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2002 | 2014 |
| HQ | Lviv, Ukraine (offices across Europe and the Americas) | Miami, Florida, USA |
| Team size | 2,000–2,500 | 251–500 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Formal staff-augmentation model backed by a 2,400-person bench | Payroll and compliance handled for LatAm hires |
| Pricing model | Time and materials; dedicated team; rates on request | Monthly per developer including payroll and compliance; rates on request |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | Python, Databricks, Apache Spark | Python, OpenAI, AWS |
| Industries served | Fintech, Manufacturing, Logistics, Healthcare, Telecom | SaaS, Fintech, E-commerce, AI labs |
N-iX vs Revelo: overview
N-iX
N-iX started in Lviv, Ukraine, in 2002 and now reports about 2,400 professionals across more than 25 countries in Europe and the Americas. Staff augmentation sits alongside managed teams and full-solution delivery as one of its three cooperation models, and its AI and machine-learning practice is supported by data-engineering and cloud groups. Clutch reviewers describe it as quick to scale teams and good at integrating developers into existing groups. It serves more than 80 active enterprise clients according to a 2026 company overview.
Revelo
Revelo traces its start to late 2014 and is headquartered in Miami, with 251–500 employees according to one directory. It runs a platform of more than 400,000 Latin American developers and handles sourcing, compliance, local payroll and benefits, so clients can hire individuals or whole teams without opening a local entity. It has also moved into LLM post-training work, supplying developers for supervised fine-tuning and RLHF projects. It has raised more than $48 million from investors including Social Capital and Valor Capital Group.
Services and capabilities: N-iX vs Revelo
| Capability | N-iX | Revelo |
|---|---|---|
| LLM / GenAI engineers | ✗ | ✓ |
| MLOps & deployment | ✓ | ✗ |
| Computer vision | ✗ | ✗ |
| Data engineering | ✓ | ✗ |
| AI agent development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Fractional / part-time experts | ✗ | ✗ |
| Risk-free trial period | ✗ | ✗ |
| Nearshore time-zone overlap | ✗ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: N-iX vs Revelo
| Framework / platform | N-iX | Revelo |
|---|---|---|
| PyTorch | N/A | N/A |
| TensorFlow | N/A | N/A |
| LangChain | N/A | N/A |
| Hugging Face | N/A | N/A |
| OpenAI | N/A | ✓ |
| AWS SageMaker | ✓ | N/A |
| Azure ML | ✓ | N/A |
| Databricks | ✓ | N/A |
| MLflow | N/A | N/A |
| Kubernetes | ✓ | N/A |
Pricing comparison: N-iX vs Revelo
| Criterion | N-iX | Revelo |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Full-time dedicated engineers, Dedicated team, Managed delivery | Full-time dedicated engineers, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: N-iX vs Revelo
| Dimension | N-iX | Revelo |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Fintech, Manufacturing, Logistics | SaaS, Fintech, E-commerce |
| Best use cases | Adding data engineers to an enterprise lakehouse program, Staffing an MLOps engineer to productionize existing models | Hiring a full-time LatAm developer with payroll handled, Staffing LLM post-training projects |
| Typical project type | Full-time dedicated engineers | Full-time dedicated engineers |
N-iX vs Revelo: pros and cons
| N-iX | |
|---|---|
| + | Large enough to staff data, ML and platform roles from one vendor |
| + | Staff augmentation is a defined product with its own process |
| + | Delivery hubs in several EU countries help with data-residency questions |
| + | Long enterprise client history |
| - | AI is one practice inside a broad software company |
| - | Enterprise sales process can be slow for a single-seat request |
| - | No public rates |
| Revelo | |
|---|---|
| + | Removes the legal and payroll work of hiring in Latin America |
| + | Large candidate pool |
| + | Experience supplying engineers for LLM training work |
| - | Platform model means vetting is lighter than at engineering agencies |
| - | AI focus leans toward LLM training data over product engineering |
| - | Pricing requires a call |
Who should choose N-iX?
A typical fit: adding data engineers to an enterprise lakehouse program.
Formal staff-augmentation model backed by a 2,400-person bench. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Fintech, Manufacturing, Logistics, Healthcare, Telecom.
Who should choose Revelo?
A typical fit: hiring a full-time LatAm developer with payroll handled.
Payroll and compliance handled for LatAm hires. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in SaaS, Fintech, E-commerce, AI labs.
Decision matrix: N-iX vs Revelo
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Both offer fixed-price models |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | N-iX |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: N-iX (Not disclosed) vs Revelo (Not disclosed) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | N-iX |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: N-iX vs Revelo
| Use case | N-iX fit | Revelo fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Adding data engineers to an enterprise lakehouse program | Strong | Limited | N-iX |
| Staffing an MLOps engineer to productionize existing models | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Hiring a full-time LatAm developer with payroll handled | Limited | Strong | Revelo |
| Staffing LLM post-training projects | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
Verdict: N-iX vs Revelo
N-iX (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Staffing projects. Formal staff-augmentation model backed by a 2,400-person bench.
Revelo (3.9/5) is worth a look if you need staffing LLM post-training projects. If your situation matches that, Revelo is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
N-iX vs Revelo FAQ
Is N-iX better than Revelo?
N-iX (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. N-iX's strongest advantage: large enough to staff data, ML and platform roles from one vendor. Revelo's strongest advantage: removes the legal and payroll work of hiring in Latin America.
How do N-iX and Revelo differ in pricing?
N-iX uses time and materials; dedicated team; rates on request pricing. Revelo uses monthly per developer including payroll and compliance; rates on request pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: N-iX or Revelo?
N-iX is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each agency before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between N-iX and Revelo?
N-iX's primary differentiator is: formal staff-augmentation model backed by a 2,400-person bench. Revelo's primary differentiator is: payroll and compliance handled for LatAm hires. They also differ in team size (2,000–2,500 vs 251–500), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Fintech, Manufacturing vs SaaS, Fintech).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.