DataArt vs Infosys: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
DataArt (4.0/5) edges ahead of Infosys (3.9/5) overall. DataArt is the better choice for US buyers in finance, media, or healthcare wanting industry-specific delivery depth. Infosys is the stronger option for US enterprises wanting a blended offshore-plus-domestic-hub delivery model. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
DataArt vs Infosys: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | DataArt | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1997 | 1981 |
| HQ | New York, New York, USA | Bengaluru, India |
| Team size | 5,700+ | 328,000+ |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A company that was founded in New York from day one, unlike a European or Indian firm that opened a US office years later | Dedicated US-based delivery hubs that blend domestic and offshore capacity instead of running a purely offshore model |
| Pricing model | Dedicated teams scoped by industry vertical | Enterprise consulting and managed delivery |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | AWS, Azure, Java | AWS, Azure, SAP |
| Industries served | Financial services, Media & entertainment, Healthcare, Travel | Financial services, Manufacturing, Retail, Insurance |
DataArt vs Infosys: overview
DataArt
DataArt was founded in New York City in 1997 by Eugene Goland and has kept its corporate headquarters there ever since, expanding to more than 5,700 professionals across 20-plus locations spanning the US, Europe, Latin America, and the Middle East. Its focus leans specifically toward finance, media and entertainment, healthcare and life sciences, retail, and travel and hospitality, industry depth rather than a horizontal generalist pitch. For a US buyer, the New York incorporation predates most of the Eastern European outsourcing wave by years, giving it a genuinely different origin story than firms that opened a US sales office after building an offshore delivery arm first.
Infosys
Infosys was founded in 1981 and is headquartered in Bengaluru, India, employing more than 328,000 people globally. Unlike some of its Indian-major peers, it has invested visibly in US-based delivery hubs, including centers in Indiana, North Carolina, and Connecticut, opened specifically to blend offshore economics with domestic delivery capacity for American clients. That hybrid model doesn't change where the bulk of its workforce sits, but it does give a US buyer a tangible local option within a much larger global structure.
Services and capabilities: DataArt vs Infosys
| Capability | DataArt | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✗ |
| IT consulting | ✗ | ✓ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Staff aug / team extension | ✗ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: DataArt vs Infosys
| Framework / platform | DataArt | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | ✓ | N/A |
| Node.js | N/A | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | N/A |
Pricing comparison: DataArt vs Infosys
| Criterion | DataArt | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Fixed project, Consulting | Consulting, Managed services, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: DataArt vs Infosys
| Dimension | DataArt | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Media & entertainment, Healthcare | Financial services, Manufacturing, Retail |
| Best use cases | A financial-services or media company wanting a vendor with genuine, decades-deep industry expertise rather than a generalist team., A US buyer specifically preferring a domestically founded firm over one that expanded into the US market later. | A US enterprise wanting a formal blended domestic-plus-offshore delivery model rather than a purely offshore arrangement., A large modernization program that benefits from Infosys's specific automation and AI tooling investments. |
| Typical project type | Dedicated team | Consulting |
DataArt vs Infosys: pros and cons
| DataArt | |
|---|---|
| + | Founded and headquartered in New York from day one, a genuinely different origin story than a vendor that added a US address later. |
| + | Deep, named-industry specialization in finance, media, healthcare, and travel rather than a generic full-stack pitch. |
| + | Nearly three decades of operating history with a stable, privately held ownership structure. |
| + | Diversified delivery footprint across four regions reduces exposure to any single country's disruption. |
| - | Industry-vertical focus is a strength for finance, media, or healthcare buyers but a weaker fit outside those specific sectors |
| - | As a privately held company, financial details aren't publicly auditable the way a NASDAQ- or NYSE-listed competitor's are |
| Infosys | |
|---|---|
| + | Purpose-built US delivery hubs in states like Indiana and North Carolina, an unusual investment relative to most offshore-first majors. |
| + | Massive global scale backing those domestic hubs when a program needs more capacity than the US centers alone provide. |
| + | Established, decades-long relationships across financial services and manufacturing specifically. |
| + | Strong publicly documented AI and automation practice built on top of its core delivery business. |
| - | The US delivery hubs are a real but relatively small slice of total headcount, so most work still routes through India |
| - | Enterprise-scale account structure and pricing that isn't well suited to a small or mid-market buyer |
Who should choose DataArt?
A typical fit: a financial-services or media company wanting a vendor with genuine, decades-deep industry expertise rather than a generalist team.
A company that was founded in New York from day one, unlike a European or Indian firm that opened a US office years later. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Media & entertainment, Healthcare, Travel.
Who should choose Infosys?
A typical fit: a US enterprise wanting a formal blended domestic-plus-offshore delivery model rather than a purely offshore arrangement.
Dedicated US-based delivery hubs that blend domestic and offshore capacity instead of running a purely offshore model. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Manufacturing, Retail, Insurance.
Decision matrix: DataArt vs Infosys
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | DataArt |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | DataArt |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: DataArt (Not disclosed) vs Infosys (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | DataArt |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Infosys |
Use case fit: DataArt vs Infosys
| Use case | DataArt fit | Infosys fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A financial-services or media company wanting a vendor with genuine, decades-deep industry expertise rather than a generalist team. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A US buyer specifically preferring a domestically founded firm over one that expanded into the US market later. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A US enterprise wanting a formal blended domestic-plus-offshore delivery model rather than a purely offshore arrangement. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A large modernization program that benefits from Infosys's specific automation and AI tooling investments. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: DataArt vs Infosys
DataArt (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IT Outsourcing (USA) projects. A company that was founded in New York from day one, unlike a European or Indian firm that opened a US office years later.
Infosys (3.9/5) is worth a look if you need a large modernization program that benefits from Infosys's specific automation and AI tooling investments. If your situation matches that, Infosys is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
DataArt vs Infosys FAQ
Is DataArt better than Infosys?
DataArt (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. DataArt's strongest advantage: founded and headquartered in New York from day one, a genuinely different origin story than a vendor that added a US address later. Infosys's strongest advantage: purpose-built US delivery hubs in states like Indiana and North Carolina, an unusual investment relative to most offshore-first majors.
How do DataArt and Infosys differ in pricing?
DataArt uses dedicated teams scoped by industry vertical pricing. Infosys uses enterprise consulting and managed delivery pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: DataArt or Infosys?
Infosys is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each company before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between DataArt and Infosys?
DataArt's primary differentiator is: a company that was founded in New York from day one, unlike a European or Indian firm that opened a US office years later. Infosys's primary differentiator is: dedicated US-based delivery hubs that blend domestic and offshore capacity instead of running a purely offshore model. They also differ in team size (5,700+ vs 328,000+), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Media & entertainment vs Financial services, Manufacturing).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.