BearingPoint vs PA Consulting: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
BearingPoint (4.1/5) edges ahead of PA Consulting (4.0/5) overall. BearingPoint is the better choice for european banks pairing AI with regulatory reporting. PA Consulting is the stronger option for UK public bodies wanting advice plus delivery. The right choice depends on how independent you need the advice to be, your regulatory exposure, and your budget.
BearingPoint vs PA Consulting: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | BearingPoint | PA Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2002 | 1943 |
| HQ | Amsterdam, Netherlands | London, UK |
| Team size | ~6,200 | ~3,900 |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | European consulting with regulatory technology products from the same group | Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government |
| Pricing model | Consulting fees; rates not published | Consulting fees; rates not published |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | EU AI Act, DORA, SAP | Azure, AWS, GDPR |
| Industries served | Banking, Insurance, Public sector, Manufacturing, Telecom | Public sector, Defense, Healthcare, Energy & utilities, Consumer |
BearingPoint vs PA Consulting: overview
BearingPoint
BearingPoint is headquartered in Amsterdam, has about 6,200 employees, and passed €1 billion in annual revenue in 2023. Its consulting unit handles advisory work, while a separate solutions business sells regulatory reporting and analytics tools. Recent AI work includes an agentic AI project in financial crime prevention for Danske Bank. Expect a European consultancy that is comfortable with regulators and runs AI advice on a fairly traditional consulting model.
PA Consulting
PA Consulting started in 1943 as Personnel Administration and is now a London-based firm with about 3,900 employees and £753 million in 2024 revenue. Jacobs has owned 65% since 2021, with staff holding the rest. Its AI advice tends to come from teams that also design and build products, especially for government, defense, and health clients in the UK and Nordics. That makes the advice practical, though rarely independent of a build.
Services and capabilities: BearingPoint vs PA Consulting
| Capability | BearingPoint | PA Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Readiness assessment | ✗ | ✗ |
| Use-case prioritization | ✓ | ✓ |
| TCO / ROI modeling | ✗ | ✗ |
| AI governance & EU AI Act | ✓ | ✗ |
| Build vs. buy advice | ✗ | ✗ |
| Independent audit or assurance | ✗ | ✗ |
| Roadmap any vendor can implement | ✗ | ✗ |
| Delivery capability after advice | ✓ | ✓ |
Frameworks and platforms: BearingPoint vs PA Consulting
| Framework / platform | BearingPoint | PA Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| EU AI Act | ✓ | ✓ |
| GDPR | N/A | ✓ |
| DORA | ✓ | N/A |
| NIST AI RMF | N/A | N/A |
| ISO/IEC 42001 | N/A | N/A |
| Azure | ✓ | ✓ |
| AWS | N/A | ✓ |
| Google Cloud | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: BearingPoint vs PA Consulting
| Criterion | BearingPoint | PA Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Multi-use-case advisory, Ongoing advisory, Delivery team | Multi-use-case advisory, Delivery team |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: BearingPoint vs PA Consulting
| Dimension | BearingPoint | PA Consulting |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Mid-market to enterprise | Mid-market to enterprise |
| Best industries | Banking, Insurance, Public sector | Public sector, Defense, Healthcare |
| Best use cases | AI in financial crime prevention., Regulatory reporting combined with AI planning. | AI planning for UK government departments., Health service AI adoption. |
| Typical project type | Multi-use-case advisory | Multi-use-case advisory |
BearingPoint vs PA Consulting: pros and cons
| BearingPoint | |
|---|---|
| + | Strong in European banking regulation |
| + | Financial crime AI work with a large Nordic bank |
| + | Mid-size alternative to the Big Four |
| - | Its own regulatory software can shape advice |
| - | AI governance is a newer practice |
| - | Rates not published |
| PA Consulting | |
|---|---|
| + | Long record with UK government and health clients |
| + | Design and engineering behind the advice |
| + | Partly owned by staff |
| - | Jacobs holds 65%, and one database reports a full acquisition in 2026 that we couldn't confirm |
| - | Advice usually comes packaged with delivery |
| - | Rates not published |
Who should choose BearingPoint?
A typical fit: AI in financial crime prevention.
European consulting with regulatory technology products from the same group. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Banking, Insurance, Public sector, Manufacturing, Telecom.
Who should choose PA Consulting?
A typical fit: AI planning for UK government departments.
Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Public sector, Defense, Healthcare, Energy & utilities, Consumer.
Decision matrix: BearingPoint vs PA Consulting
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You want advice with no build contract attached | Neither; write the build as a separate decision |
| Finance needs run costs before approving anything | Neither lists cost modeling; ask for a sample |
| Some of your use cases may be high-risk under the EU AI Act | BearingPoint |
| You need an outside check on a system already built | Neither; use a dedicated auditor |
| You want the same firm to build what it recommends | Both can deliver |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: BearingPoint (Not disclosed) vs PA Consulting (Not disclosed) |
| You need advisers in many countries at once | BearingPoint |
Use case fit: BearingPoint vs PA Consulting
| Use case | BearingPoint fit | PA Consulting fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI in financial crime prevention. | Strong | Limited | BearingPoint |
| Regulatory reporting combined with AI planning. | Strong | Limited | BearingPoint |
| AI planning for UK government departments. | Limited | Strong | PA Consulting |
| Health service AI adoption. | Limited | Strong | PA Consulting |
Verdict: BearingPoint vs PA Consulting
BearingPoint (4.1/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Advisory projects. European consulting with regulatory technology products from the same group.
PA Consulting (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need health service AI adoption. If your situation matches that, PA Consulting is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
BearingPoint vs PA Consulting FAQ
Is BearingPoint better than PA Consulting?
BearingPoint (4.1/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. BearingPoint's strongest advantage: strong in European banking regulation. PA Consulting's strongest advantage: long record with UK government and health clients.
How do BearingPoint and PA Consulting differ in pricing?
BearingPoint's pricing: consulting fees; rates not published. PA Consulting's pricing: consulting fees; rates not published. Any hourly bands shown come from Clutch, not a published rate card, so a scoping call is still needed for a project quote.
Which is better for enterprise: BearingPoint or PA Consulting?
BearingPoint is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each firm before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between BearingPoint and PA Consulting?
BearingPoint's primary differentiator is: european consulting with regulatory technology products from the same group. PA Consulting's primary differentiator is: advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government. They also differ in team size (~6,200 vs ~3,900), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Banking, Insurance vs Public sector, Defense).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.