Loading home_quiz_hero...
Loading companies_listing...
Loading md_typography...
Loading categories_listing_v2...
Loading about_authors...
Around 97% of organizations now use agile methods to some extent, according to industry surveys aggregated across the State of Agile research. Agile isn't an alternative methodology anymore. It's the default. When you search for "agile development companies," you're not looking for companies that do something unusual — you're looking for software development companies that do agile well. The distinction matters because it changes how you evaluate vendors.
This guide uses proprietary data from 1,902 custom software development providers across 72 countries — the category where agile practices are most directly applied — combined with the latest agile adoption research and salary data from 217,000+ Stack Overflow respondents across 7 years. The goal: help you distinguish companies that genuinely practice agile from those that list it on their website.
The enterprise agile transformation services market is expected to reach $96.28 billion by 2029, growing at 18.5% CAGR from a $48.75 billion base in 2025. That growth reflects the gap between agile adoption (near-universal) and agile maturity (much rarer). Organizations are paying for help not with adopting agile but with doing it well at scale.
Methodology adoption among agile practitioners, per the 17th State of Agile Report:
| Methodology | Adoption | Context |
|---|---|---|
| Scrum | 87% | Dominant team-level framework |
| Kanban | 56% | Often combined with Scrum |
| ScrumBan | 27% | Hybrid gaining traction |
| SAFe | 26% | Most popular scaling framework, though declining from previous years |
| Iterative | 20% | General iterative without specific framework |
| Scrum/XP Hybrid | 13% | Extreme Programming practices within Scrum |
65% of organizations now adopt a scaled agile approach for larger projects. SAFe remains the most popular at 26%, but over a third of organizations say they use no mandated scaling framework at all, preferring custom approaches. This fragmentation means the "right" agile approach varies significantly between vendors.
The Standish Group CHAOS Report data (covering 2013-2020) remains the most cited evidence on agile effectiveness: agile projects succeed at a 42% rate compared to 13% for waterfall, and fail at 11% versus 59%. Agile projects are roughly three times more likely to succeed. Those numbers help explain why 97% adoption occurred — but they also mean that 58% of agile projects are still challenged or failing. The methodology alone doesn't guarantee outcomes.
"Agile development" is a methodology, not a discrete service category. In our dataset of 4,145 software development companies, agile isn't listed as a standalone service — it's the operational approach underlying custom software, web, mobile, and DevOps work. The most direct proxy for agile-practicing providers is custom software development, where iterative, sprint-based delivery is the standard operating model.
Our analysis of 1,902 custom software development providers across 72 countries shows the market landscape:
| Rate Tier | Median Rate | Market Segment |
|---|---|---|
| Budget | $20-$29/hr | India, Vietnam, Pakistan — sprint-based delivery, mobile and web |
| Mid-market | $30-$49/hr | US (median), Poland, Ukraine — full-stack agile teams |
| Premium | $50-$99/hr | UK, Australia, Canada — enterprise agile transformation |
| Top-tier | $100-$200+/hr | Specialized agile consultancies, SAFe implementation |
Common service overlaps show what complementary capabilities to expect:
This overlap means most agile vendors can handle your full product development lifecycle — frontend, backend, and deployment. The 64% offering machine learning reflects the growing integration of AI capabilities into agile delivery workflows.
66.4% of providers are generalists offering 8+ services, with a median of 10 services per company. Only 5.8% are specialists (3 or fewer services) — lower than web development (17.2%) or mobile (10.8%), reflecting that custom software development is inherently broad-scope work.
Budget accessibility: 26.3% accept projects under $5,000 — enough for an agile discovery sprint or initial backlog refinement. Another 26.8% start at $5,000-$10,000 (a typical 2-4 week sprint engagement). Enterprise agile transformation ($50K+) narrows to 7.4%. 6.1% of providers focus on startups.
Agile-practicing companies skew mid-size, with the 50-249 employee bracket dominant:
| Company Size | Providers | % | Median Clutch Rating |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2-9 employees | 11 | 0.6% | 4.9 |
| 10-49 employees | 678 | 35.6% | 5.0 |
| 50-249 employees | 842 | 44.3% | 4.9 |
| 250-999 employees | 204 | 10.7% | 4.9 |
| 1,000+ employees | 45 | 2.4% | 4.8 |
Among the 985 providers (51.8%) with verified Clutch ratings, smaller firms rate higher — the 10-49 bracket hits a 5.0 median while firms over 1,000 employees drop to 4.8. This pattern is consistent across every service category we analyze (DevOps, ML, custom software), so it likely reflects rating mechanics and client selectivity rather than anything agile-specific. Still, for agile engagements where team cohesion matters, working with a smaller firm means your project gets senior attention rather than being one account among hundreds. For teams that need to scale without losing that focus, staff augmentation lets you add individual engineers to an existing sprint team rather than engaging a full vendor organization.
The market is mature: 60.4% of providers were founded between 2011 and 2020. Only 9.5% are post-2021 entrants. If you're evaluating vendor stability, the majority have 5-15 years of delivery history behind their agile practices.
Our analysis shows where custom software development providers concentrate their industry expertise, with agile relevance noted for each:
| Industry | % of Providers | Agile Relevance |
|---|---|---|
| eCommerce | 74% | Sprint-based feature delivery, A/B testing cycles, rapid iteration |
| Medical / Healthcare | 73% | Regulated agile (HIPAA-compliant sprints), incremental validation |
| Financial Services | 59% | Auditable sprint records, compliance-aware iteration |
| Media | 52% | Content platform iteration, audience-driven features |
| Education | 50% | Learning platform evolution, user feedback loops |
| Supply Chain / Logistics | 44% | Real-time system iteration, demand-responsive development |
eCommerce and healthcare lead because both industries benefit from agile's core strengths: frequent delivery cycles, rapid response to user feedback, and incremental risk reduction. Healthcare providers combining agile with cybersecurity compliance can deliver in regulated environments without sacrificing iteration velocity.
Understanding what software engineers earn helps contextualize what providers charge. Based on salary data from 217,368 Stack Overflow respondents in custom software development roles across 7 years:
| Country | 2022 Median | 2023 Median | 2024 Median | Trajectory |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | $140,000 | $145,000 | $140,000 | Returned to 2022 baseline |
| Australia | $92,002 | $92,545 | $92,492 | Flat — remarkably stable |
| Canada | $89,797 | $89,222 | $83,597 | Declining |
| United Kingdom | $75,384 | $80,690 | $82,802 | Growing steadily |
| Germany | $66,540 | $74,856 | $71,962 | Peaked 2023, dropped |
| Poland | $46,620 | $59,815 | $58,841 | Strong growth from low base |
| Ukraine | $42,000 | $54,118 | $41,981 | Volatile |
| India | $22,570 | $21,447 | $20,338 | Declining |
Source: Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2018-2024, 217,368 respondents
Reading top to bottom: US (peaked at $145K, returned to $140K), Australia (consistently flat at $92K), Canada (declining from $90K to $84K), UK (only major market with sustained growth), Germany (peaked then dropped), Poland (strong growth), India (declining).
How engineer salaries compare to what providers charge:
| Country | Engineer Salary (2024 Median) | Provider Rate (Median) | Implied Annual Billing | Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States | $140,000 | $30-$49/hr (~$72K/yr) | ~$62K-$98K | 0.4-0.7x |
| Poland | $58,841 | $30-$49/hr (~$72K/yr) | ~$62K-$98K | 1.1-1.7x |
| India | $20,338 | $20-$29/hr (~$48K/yr) | ~$40K-$58K | 2.0-2.9x |
| Ukraine | $41,981 | $30-$49/hr (~$72K/yr) | ~$62K-$98K | 1.5-2.3x |
The US ratio below 1.0x reflects a common outsourcing pattern: many US-listed providers deliver through offshore or nearshore teams, which is why provider rates fall below US engineer salaries. India's ratio (2.0-2.9x) suggests wider vendor margins, though India's declining developer salaries ($22.5K → $20.3K) may signal talent quality pressures at the lower end of the market.
The 2025 DORA Report from Google identifies psychological safety — where team members feel safe to take risks and voice concerns — as one of the strongest predictors of software delivery performance. That finding reframes agile vendor evaluation: the methodology matters less than the team culture executing it.
Three signals separate companies that genuinely practice agile from those that use the terminology as marketing:
First, sprint cadence and artifacts. Ask what their sprint length is (1-4 weeks is standard), whether they produce sprint reviews with demos, and how they handle retrospectives. A vendor that can't describe their retrospective process probably isn't doing agile in practice.
Second, backlog management discipline. How do they prioritize work? Who owns the product backlog? Do they use story points, t-shirt sizing, or another estimation method? Agile without disciplined backlog management is just ad-hoc development with standups.
Third, delivery metrics. Do they track velocity, cycle time, or DORA metrics (deployment frequency, lead time, change failure rate, mean time to recovery)? Vendors who measure their delivery performance can improve it. Those who don't are guessing. Providers with strong DevOps practices typically excel here because CI/CD pipelines make these metrics measurable by default. For teams managing remote development, delivery metrics become even more critical because you can't observe work happening in person.
The technologies providers use affect how well they can deliver in sprint-based cycles:
| Technology | % of Providers | Agile Context |
|---|---|---|
| AI (General) | 79% | AI-assisted development, automated testing, code review |
| React | 59% | Component-based UI development fits sprint-based delivery |
| iOS / Android | 56% / 53% | Mobile sprints, iterative app releases |
| Java | 43% | Enterprise agile, microservices architecture |
| Python | 39% | Rapid prototyping, data pipeline sprints |
| AWS | 38% | CI/CD infrastructure, deployment automation |
The technology stack matters for agile because some architectures support iterative delivery better than others. Microservices (Java, Python, Node.js) enable independent deployment per sprint. Monolithic architectures make sprint-level shipping harder. When evaluating providers for custom software development, verify that their architecture choices align with the iteration cadence your project requires.
Watch for these warning signs during agile vendor evaluation:
Among the 985 providers (51.8%) with verified Clutch ratings:
| Country | Providers | Mean Clutch Rating | Median Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vietnam | 43 | 4.92 | $20-$29/hr |
| Ukraine | 84 | 4.92 | $30-$49/hr |
| Pakistan | 53 | 4.91 | $30-$49/hr |
| Poland | 104 | 4.91 | $30-$49/hr |
| Australia | 25 | 4.91 | $50-$99/hr |
| United Kingdom | 71 | 4.91 | $50-$99/hr |
| United States | 620 | 4.87 | $30-$49/hr |
| Canada | 38 | 4.85 | $30-$49/hr |
| India | 548 | 4.84 | $20-$29/hr |
Vietnam and Ukraine lead quality-to-cost for agile engagements. India has the most providers (548) but the lowest average rating (4.84) among major markets. The rating spread is tight (4.84 to 4.92), so use ratings as a filter rather than a primary decision driver.
For regional pricing context and a broader comparison, see our guide on software outsourcing costs. For organizations evaluating offshore development partners, agile practices become even more important because distributed teams depend on sprint structure and communication rituals to stay aligned.
Our GSC Score synthesizes review quality (40%), technical capability (30%), and domain authority (30%) across providers offering custom software development and related agile-delivered services. Rankings update quarterly across leading software development companies. For a complete vendor evaluation framework, see our guide on how to choose a software development company.
Ask for sprint artifacts: burndown charts, sprint review recordings, retrospective notes. Request a sample sprint plan showing backlog items, story points, and acceptance criteria. Companies that practice agile can produce these immediately. Companies that just use the label cannot. Also ask about their SDLC approach and where agile fits within it.
Agile delivers working software every 1-4 weeks with built-in feedback loops. Waterfall delivers a complete product at the end of a fixed timeline. The Standish Group data shows agile projects succeed at 42% vs 13% for waterfall. When outsourcing software development, agile's advantage is that you see progress and can course-correct early. Our waterfall vs agile comparison covers the trade-offs in detail.
Rates range from $20/hr (India, Vietnam) to $200+/hr (specialized US/UK consultancies), with a global median of $30-$49/hr. 26.3% of providers accept projects under $5,000 for discovery sprints. Full product development engagements ($25K-$50K) are served by 12.2%. Enterprise agile transformation ($100K+) narrows to 1.7%. For longer engagements, building dedicated teams with your vendor often provides better sprint continuity than project-based contracts.
Scrum (87% adoption) is the safe default for most projects. Kanban works better for maintenance and support work where priorities shift frequently. SAFe (26%) is the leading option for large-scale programs with multiple teams, though its overhead suits organizations with 50+ developers better than smaller teams. Many experienced providers use hybrid approaches tailored to project needs rather than following one framework rigidly.
Yes, through fixed-price sprint contracts where scope flexes within each sprint but the cost per sprint is fixed. This preserves agile's iterative benefits while giving buyers cost predictability. Avoid vendors who claim to do "agile" but only offer traditional fixed-scope contracts — that's waterfall with different vocabulary. The pros and cons of outsourcing become most apparent in how contracts handle scope flexibility.
[1] State of Agile Report (17th Annual, Digital.ai) — 87% Scrum, 56% Kanban, 26% SAFe, 65% scaled agile adoption.
[2] Standish Group CHAOS Report (2013-2020 data) — Agile 42% success vs Waterfall 13%. Agile 11% failure vs Waterfall 59%.
[3] DORA Report 2025 (Google Cloud) — Psychological safety as strongest delivery performance predictor.
[4] Agile Statistics and Market Data (ElectroIQ, 2025) — Enterprise agile transformation market $48.75B (2025), $96.28B by 2029.
[5] Stack Overflow Developer Survey 2018-2024 — 217,368 respondents in custom software development roles. Salary data by country and year. Licensed ODbL v1.0.
[6] Internal analysis of 4,145 software development company profiles aggregated from Clutch, TechReviewer, and proprietary scoring datasets (January 2026 snapshot). Custom Software Development service data based on 1,902 providers across 72 countries.
Find the Best Agile Software Development Companies in 2026 — in Under 60 Seconds
Compare 100s of software development companies.
Evaluate the pros and cons of each company based on your requirements.
Results based on 700+ hours of industry research.
At Global Software Companies, we bring together a global collective of industry professionals, researchers, and analysts with deep experience in software development, team building, and engineering operations.
Our goal is to make software outsourcing smarter, leaner, and more transparent. We’ve partnered with experts across Latin America, Eastern Europe, Asia, and beyond to share insights and help businesses navigate the complex world of software development partnerships.
We believe in three core principles:
Whether you’re launching a startup or managing a global IT strategy, we’re here to simplify your vendor selection process and empower you to build with confidence.
