Method vs UXDA: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
UXDA (4.2/5) edges ahead of Method (3.7/5) overall. UXDA is the better choice for banks and fintech, exclusively financial-services UX. Method is the stronger option for enterprises wanting design-thinking backed by GlobalLogic scale. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Method vs UXDA: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Method | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1999 | 2015 |
| HQ | San Francisco, CA, USA (also London and New York) | Riga, Latvia |
| Team size | Not published (operates within GlobalLogic's global workforce) | 25+ |
| Rating | 3.7 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A quarter-century of design-thinking work for Google, Comcast, Samsung, and the BBC, now backed by GlobalLogic's engineering scale | The only company in this pool exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries |
| Pricing model | Enterprise consulting engagement (project-based or retainer) | Fixed project, retainer |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, Design systems/Storybook | Figma, Sketch, Design systems/Storybook |
| Industries served | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment | Financial services / fintech |
Method vs UXDA: overview
Method
Five founders — Kevin Farnham, David Lipkin, Patrick Newbery, Mike Abbink, and Meng Mantasoot — started Method in 1999, building a design and innovation consultancy out of San Francisco with offices in London and New York. GlobalLogic acquired Method in 2011, and in 2021 the firm merged with sister company Skookum, adding offices in Charlotte, Atlanta, and Denver. Method's client list — Google, Comcast, Samsung, Nokia, Microsoft, the BBC, Nissan, Nordstrom — reflects a quarter-century of user-centered design thinking work for large brands.
UXDA
Alex Kreger and co-founder Linda launched UXDA (Financial UX Design) in 2015, keeping the team small and specific — 25+ multidisciplinary specialists in Riga, Latvia. A decade later, that focus has produced 150+ banking and fintech digital platforms defined or governed across 39 countries. There's no branding or consumer-product work to point to here, which is exactly the point: every engagement is financial-services UX, making UXDA the clearest single-vertical fintech specialist in this pool.
Services and capabilities: Method vs UXDA
| Capability | Method | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✓ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✓ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Method vs UXDA
| Framework / platform | Method | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | ✓ | ✓ |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Method vs UXDA
| Criterion | Method | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer, Dedicated team | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Method vs UXDA
| Dimension | Method | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment | Financial services / fintech |
| Best use cases | Enterprise product design backed by a larger engineering organization, Media or telecom digital product redesign for a large brand | Bank digital platform redesign, Fintech app UX for a regulated market |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Method vs UXDA: pros and cons
| Method | |
|---|---|
| + | Quarter-century client history including Google, Comcast, Samsung, Nokia, Microsoft, and the BBC |
| + | GlobalLogic ownership since 2011 provides access to a much larger engineering organization |
| + | 2021 merger with Skookum added US office presence in Charlotte, Atlanta, and Denver |
| + | Design-thinking-led methodology with a long, publicly documented case-study history |
| - | Acquired by GlobalLogic in 2011 — no longer an independently owned design consultancy |
| - | Team size isn't published separately from GlobalLogic's much larger combined workforce |
| - | Enterprise consulting scale and pricing are less accessible to startups than boutique studios |
| UXDA | |
|---|---|
| + | Exclusive financial-services focus gives it domain expertise generalist companies simply can't match |
| + | 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries over a decade |
| + | Small, senior 25+ team keeps client relationships direct rather than layered through account management |
| + | A decade of continuous, single-vertical operation compounds domain knowledge over time |
| - | The exclusive fintech focus is a real limitation for any client outside financial services |
| - | $30K minimum engagement (per company website; independently unverifiable) runs higher than most 25-person boutiques |
| - | Small team size (25+) caps capacity for very large, multi-workstream programs |
Who should choose Method?
A typical fit: enterprise product design backed by a larger engineering organization.
A quarter-century of design-thinking work for Google, Comcast, Samsung, and the BBC, now backed by GlobalLogic's engineering scale. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Consumer products, Media & entertainment.
Who should choose UXDA?
A typical fit: bank digital platform redesign.
The only company in this pool exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries. Minimum engagement starts at $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech.
Decision matrix: Method vs UXDA
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Method |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Method |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Method (Not published) vs UXDA ($30K (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Method |
| 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: Method vs UXDA
| Use case | Method fit | UXDA fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enterprise product design backed by a larger engineering organization | Strong | Limited | Method |
| Media or telecom digital product redesign for a large brand | Strong | Limited | Method |
| Bank digital platform redesign | Limited | Strong | UXDA |
| Fintech app UX for a regulated market | Limited | Strong | UXDA |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Method vs UXDA
UXDA (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. The only company in this pool exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries.
Method (3.7/5) is worth a look if you need media or telecom digital product redesign for a large brand. If your situation matches that, Method is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Method vs UXDA FAQ
Is Method better than UXDA?
UXDA (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Method's strongest advantage: quarter-century client history including Google, Comcast, Samsung, Nokia, Microsoft, and the BBC. UXDA's strongest advantage: exclusive financial-services focus gives it domain expertise generalist companies simply can't match.
How do Method and UXDA differ in pricing?
Method uses enterprise consulting engagement (project-based or retainer) pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. UXDA uses fixed project, retainer pricing with a minimum engagement of $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Method or UXDA?
UXDA 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 Method and UXDA?
Method's primary differentiator is: a quarter-century of design-thinking work for Google, Comcast, Samsung, and the BBC, now backed by GlobalLogic's engineering scale. UXDA's primary differentiator is: the only company in this pool exclusively focused on financial services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries. They also differ in team size (Not published (operates within GlobalLogic's global workforce) vs 25+), minimum engagement (Not published vs $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (Enterprise transformation, Consumer products vs Financial services / fintech).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.