EPAM Systems vs Infosys: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
EPAM Systems (4.4/5) edges ahead of Infosys (3.9/5) overall. EPAM Systems is the better choice for US enterprises that want a publicly traded vendor with audited financials. 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.
EPAM Systems vs Infosys: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | EPAM Systems | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1993 | 1981 |
| HQ | Newtown, Pennsylvania, USA (large Ukraine delivery centers) | Bengaluru, India |
| Team size | 50,000+ globally; large Ukraine workforce | 328,000+ |
| Rating | 4.4 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | The only company on this list that is both US-incorporated and NYSE-listed, with the disclosure obligations that come with it | Dedicated US-based delivery hubs that blend domestic and offshore capacity instead of running a purely offshore model |
| Pricing model | Enterprise engagement models, dedicated teams, and managed delivery, negotiated per program | Enterprise consulting and managed delivery |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | AWS, Azure, GCP | AWS, Azure, SAP |
| Industries served | Financial services, Healthcare, Retail, Media | Financial services, Manufacturing, Retail, Insurance |
EPAM Systems vs Infosys: overview
EPAM Systems
EPAM Systems is headquartered in Newtown, Pennsylvania and trades on the New York Stock Exchange under NYSE: EPAM, which puts it in a different regulatory and financial-disclosure category than almost every other company reviewed here. Founded in 1993, it employs more than 50,000 people globally, with a large share of engineering delivery historically concentrated in Ukraine and Belarus before the company diversified its delivery footprint further across Central Europe, Latin America, and India in response to regional disruption. For a US procurement team, the NYSE listing means audited public financials and SEC disclosure, a level of transparency few privately held outsourcing vendors offer.
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: EPAM Systems vs Infosys
| Capability | EPAM Systems | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Custom software development | ✓ | ✗ |
| IT consulting | ✗ | ✓ |
| Cloud & DevOps | ✓ | ✓ |
| Staff aug / team extension | ✗ | ✗ |
| Fixed-price projects | ✓ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✓ | ✓ |
Tech stack comparison: EPAM Systems vs Infosys
| Framework / platform | EPAM Systems | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| Node.js | N/A | N/A |
| Java | ✓ | N/A |
Pricing comparison: EPAM Systems vs Infosys
| Criterion | EPAM Systems | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not published |
| Engagement models | Dedicated team, Fixed project, Managed services | Consulting, Managed services, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: EPAM Systems vs Infosys
| Dimension | EPAM Systems | Infosys |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Financial services, Healthcare, Retail | Financial services, Manufacturing, Retail |
| Best use cases | A public company or regulated enterprise that specifically wants a vendor with SEC-level financial transparency., A large-scale digital transformation program that needs sustained capacity across multiple delivery regions. | 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 |
EPAM Systems vs Infosys: pros and cons
| EPAM Systems | |
|---|---|
| + | Publicly traded on NYSE, so financial health and disclosures are auditable rather than taken on faith the way a private vendor requires. |
| + | US-incorporated with a Pennsylvania headquarters, giving procurement a domestic legal entity by default. |
| + | Deep, decades-long engineering bench across Central and Eastern Europe backing that US corporate shell. |
| + | Diversified delivery footprint across multiple regions reduces single-country geopolitical exposure compared to firms concentrated in one country. |
| - | Public-company scale means formal governance and account processes that move more slowly than a boutique vendor's |
| - | Pricing sits closer to large-enterprise-consulting territory than to a boutique firm's rates, which a smaller buyer should budget for upfront |
| 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 EPAM Systems?
A typical fit: a public company or regulated enterprise that specifically wants a vendor with SEC-level financial transparency.
The only company on this list that is both US-incorporated and NYSE-listed, with the disclosure obligations that come with it. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Financial services, Healthcare, Retail, Media.
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: EPAM Systems vs Infosys
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | EPAM Systems |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | EPAM Systems |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: EPAM Systems (Not disclosed) vs Infosys (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | EPAM Systems |
| 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: EPAM Systems vs Infosys
| Use case | EPAM Systems fit | Infosys fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A public company or regulated enterprise that specifically wants a vendor with SEC-level financial transparency. | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| A large-scale digital transformation program that needs sustained capacity across multiple delivery regions. | 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: EPAM Systems vs Infosys
EPAM Systems (4.4/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IT Outsourcing (USA) projects. The only company on this list that is both US-incorporated and NYSE-listed, with the disclosure obligations that come with it.
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
EPAM Systems vs Infosys FAQ
Is EPAM Systems better than Infosys?
EPAM Systems (4.4/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. EPAM Systems's strongest advantage: publicly traded on NYSE, so financial health and disclosures are auditable rather than taken on faith the way a private vendor requires. 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 EPAM Systems and Infosys differ in pricing?
EPAM Systems uses enterprise engagement models, dedicated teams, and managed delivery, negotiated per program 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: EPAM Systems 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 EPAM Systems and Infosys?
EPAM Systems's primary differentiator is: the only company on this list that is both US-incorporated and NYSE-listed, with the disclosure obligations that come with it. 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 (50,000+ globally; large Ukraine workforce vs 328,000+), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not published), and primary industries served (Financial services, Healthcare vs Financial services, Manufacturing).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.