Qubika vs Azumo: full comparison for 2026
Last updated: August 2026
Quick verdict
Qubika (4.1/5) edges ahead of Azumo (4.0/5) overall. Qubika is the better choice for uS buyers wanting a large Latin American delivery bench for agentic AI, managed through a US-based entity.. Azumo is the stronger option for uS companies that want nearshore-priced engineering with named framework expertise in LangGraph, CrewAI, and AutoGen.. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Qubika vs Azumo: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Qubika | Azumo |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2006 | 2016 |
| HQ | Austin, TX, USA | San Francisco, CA, USA |
| Team size | 501–1,000 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Best for | US buyers wanting a large Latin American delivery bench for agentic AI, managed through a US-based entity. | US companies that want nearshore-priced engineering with named framework expertise in LangGraph, CrewAI, and AutoGen. |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, dedicated team | Dedicated team, staff augmentation |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Python, LangChain, AWS | Python, LangGraph, CrewAI |
| Industries served | Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services | Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services, Healthcare |
Qubika vs Azumo: overview
Qubika
Qubika was formed from the merger of Moove It and December Labs, tracing its roots to 2006, and is headquartered in Austin, Texas with delivery centers throughout Latin America and roughly 879 employees. Its digital product and AI/cloud services practice has extended into agentic AI, giving clients access to a large Latin American engineering bench alongside a US legal and account-management entity. Its broader digital-product origins mean agentic-specific depth should be confirmed against more concentrated specialists if that is the top priority.
Azumo
Azumo is a nearshore software development firm founded in 2016 and headquartered in San Francisco, with roughly 110 employees spread across South America, North America, and Asia. It explicitly builds production-grade agentic systems using LangGraph, CrewAI, and Microsoft AutoGen, coordinating multiple models and tools to complete multi-step business processes autonomously — a level of framework specificity procurement and technical teams can verify directly. Its nearshore staffing model trades some of the premium of onshore-only teams for time-zone-aligned delivery.
Services and capabilities: Qubika vs Azumo
| Capability | Qubika | Azumo |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-agent orchestration | ✗ | ✓ |
| RAG / knowledge integration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Workflow & systems integration | ✓ | ✓ |
| Coding agents | ✓ | ✓ |
| Monitoring & anomaly detection | ✗ | ✗ |
| Customer-facing agents | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Qubika vs Azumo
| Framework / platform | Qubika | Azumo |
|---|---|---|
| LangChain | ✓ | N/A |
| LangGraph | N/A | ✓ |
| AutoGen | N/A | ✓ |
| LlamaIndex | N/A | N/A |
| OpenAI | N/A | N/A |
| Anthropic Claude | N/A | N/A |
| Pinecone | N/A | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure | N/A | N/A |
| Kubernetes | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Qubika vs Azumo
| Criterion | Qubika | Azumo |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Dedicated team, Staff augmentation |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Qubika vs Azumo
| Dimension | Qubika | Azumo |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Mid-market to enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services | Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services |
| Best use cases | US companies wanting a large nearshore Latin American team for agentic AI development, Bundling agentic AI into a broader digital product engineering engagement | Building autonomous multi-agent systems that coordinate across CrewAI or AutoGen agents, Extending an internal engineering team with nearshore agentic AI capacity |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Dedicated team |
Qubika vs Azumo: pros and cons
| Qubika | |
|---|---|
| + | US headquarters (Austin, TX) with a large, multi-country Latin American delivery bench |
| + | Nearly two decades of combined operating history (via Moove It and December Labs) since 2006 |
| + | ~879 employees gives meaningful capacity for larger agentic programs |
| + | Broader digital product engineering background helps agentic features ship inside real products |
| - | Agentic AI is one offering within a broad digital product and cloud portfolio, not a standalone specialty |
| - | Merger history (Moove It + December Labs) means account continuity is worth confirming directly |
| - | Minimum engagement figures are not published, requiring direct sales contact for early budgeting |
| Azumo | |
|---|---|
| + | Named, current expertise across three major multi-agent orchestration frameworks |
| + | Nearshore staffing (South/North America) keeps time zones aligned with US clients |
| + | ~110-person team stays small enough for direct engineering access without large-firm layers |
| + | Founded 2016 with a decade of nearshore delivery track record |
| - | Smaller team than the larger engineering firms limits very large concurrent programs |
| - | Public enterprise-scale compliance certifications are less documented than at bigger competitors |
| - | Delivery model depends on continued nearshore talent availability across multiple countries |
Who should choose Qubika?
Qubika is the right choice for uS buyers wanting a large Latin American delivery bench for agentic AI, managed through a US-based entity..
A US headquarters paired with a large, multi-country Latin American delivery bench (~879 people) formed from two merged digital product firms.. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services.
Who should choose Azumo?
Azumo is the right choice for uS companies that want nearshore-priced engineering with named framework expertise in LangGraph, CrewAI, and AutoGen..
Explicit, named production experience with LangGraph, CrewAI, and Microsoft AutoGen for autonomous multi-agent orchestration.. Minimum engagement starts at $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce, Financial Services, Healthcare.
Decision matrix: Qubika vs Azumo
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Qubika |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Qubika |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Qubika (Not published) vs Azumo ($20K (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Azumo |
| 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: Qubika vs Azumo
| Use case | Qubika fit | Azumo fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| US companies wanting a large nearshore Latin American team for agentic AI development | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Bundling agentic AI into a broader digital product engineering engagement | Strong | Limited | Qubika |
| Building autonomous multi-agent systems that coordinate across CrewAI or AutoGen agents | Limited | Strong | Azumo |
| Extending an internal engineering team with nearshore agentic AI capacity | Limited | Strong | Azumo |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Qubika vs Azumo
Qubika (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Agentic AI Development projects. A US headquarters paired with a large, multi-country Latin American delivery bench (~879 people) formed from two merged digital product firms.. It is best for uS buyers wanting a large Latin American delivery bench for agentic AI, managed through a US-based entity..
Azumo (4.0/5) is the better choice when uS companies that want nearshore-priced engineering with named framework expertise in LangGraph, CrewAI, and AutoGen.. If your situation matches those criteria, Azumo is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Qubika vs Azumo FAQ
Is Qubika better than Azumo?
Qubika (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Qubika is better for uS buyers wanting a large Latin American delivery bench for agentic AI, managed through a US-based entity.. Azumo is better for uS companies that want nearshore-priced engineering with named framework expertise in LangGraph, CrewAI, and AutoGen..
How do Qubika and Azumo differ in pricing?
Qubika uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Azumo uses dedicated team, staff augmentation pricing with a minimum engagement of $20K (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: Qubika or Azumo?
Qubika 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 Qubika and Azumo?
Qubika's primary differentiator is: a us headquarters paired with a large, multi-country latin american delivery bench (~879 people) formed from two merged digital product firms.. Azumo's primary differentiator is: explicit, named production experience with langgraph, crewai, and microsoft autogen for autonomous multi-agent orchestration.. They also differ in team size (501–1,000 vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not published vs $20K (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce vs Technology & SaaS, Retail & E-commerce).
Last reviewed: August 2026. Verify all details directly with each provider before making a decision.