PA Consulting vs Eticas: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
PA Consulting (4.0/5) edges ahead of Eticas (4.0/5) overall. PA Consulting is the better choice for UK public bodies wanting advice plus delivery. Eticas is the stronger option for public bodies auditing deployed algorithms. The right choice depends on how independent you need the advice to be, your regulatory exposure, and your budget.
PA Consulting vs Eticas: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | PA Consulting | Eticas |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1943 | 2012 |
| HQ | London, UK | Barcelona, Spain |
| Team size | ~3,900 | 11–50 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government | Independent algorithmic audits that measure bias and accuracy in real use |
| Pricing model | Consulting fees; rates not published | Audit fees and platform subscriptions; rates on request |
| Min. engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Primary tech stack | Azure, AWS, GDPR | EU AI Act, GDPR, ITACA |
| Industries served | Public sector, Defense, Healthcare, Energy & utilities, Consumer | Public sector, Healthcare, Financial services, Social services |
PA Consulting vs Eticas: overview
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.
Eticas
Eticas was founded by Gemma Galdon-Clavell, who led it from research on surveillance and urban policy into algorithmic auditing. A 2019 profile put the team at about 30 people, and current directory estimates range from 11 to 50. Its audits trace the rules behind a system, measure disparate impact on specific groups, and check accuracy in operation, while its ITACA platform adds ongoing monitoring. The firm checks AI that already exists rather than planning new programs.
Services and capabilities: PA Consulting vs Eticas
| Capability | PA Consulting | Eticas |
|---|---|---|
| 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: PA Consulting vs Eticas
| Framework / platform | PA Consulting | Eticas |
|---|---|---|
| EU AI Act | ✓ | ✓ |
| GDPR | ✓ | ✓ |
| DORA | N/A | N/A |
| NIST AI RMF | N/A | N/A |
| ISO/IEC 42001 | N/A | N/A |
| Azure | ✓ | N/A |
| AWS | ✓ | N/A |
| Google Cloud | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: PA Consulting vs Eticas
| Criterion | PA Consulting | Eticas |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not disclosed | Not disclosed |
| Engagement models | Multi-use-case advisory, Delivery team | Audit or certification, Ongoing advisory |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: PA Consulting vs Eticas
| Dimension | PA Consulting | Eticas |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Mid-market to enterprise | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Public sector, Defense, Healthcare | Public sector, Healthcare, Financial services |
| Best use cases | AI planning for UK government departments., Health service AI adoption. | Bias audits of public-sector algorithms., Ongoing monitoring of a deployed AI system. |
| Typical project type | Multi-use-case advisory | Audit or certification |
PA Consulting vs Eticas: pros and cons
| 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 |
| Eticas | |
|---|---|
| + | Audits come from outside the team that built the system |
| + | Measures bias for specific groups, beyond overall averages |
| + | Ongoing monitoring through its ITACA platform |
| - | Founding date and headquarters vary across sources |
| - | Small team |
| - | Doesn't plan AI portfolios or business cases |
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.
Who should choose Eticas?
A typical fit: bias audits of public-sector algorithms.
Independent algorithmic audits that measure bias and accuracy in real use. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Public sector, Healthcare, Financial services, Social services.
Decision matrix: PA Consulting vs Eticas
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You want advice with no build contract attached | Eticas |
| 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 | Eticas |
| You need an outside check on a system already built | Eticas |
| You want the same firm to build what it recommends | PA Consulting |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: PA Consulting (Not disclosed) vs Eticas (Not disclosed) |
| You need advisers in many countries at once | PA Consulting |
Use case fit: PA Consulting vs Eticas
| Use case | PA Consulting fit | Eticas fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI planning for UK government departments. | Strong | Limited | PA Consulting |
| Health service AI adoption. | Strong | Limited | PA Consulting |
| Bias audits of public-sector algorithms. | Limited | Strong | Eticas |
| Ongoing monitoring of a deployed AI system. | Limited | Strong | Eticas |
Verdict: PA Consulting vs Eticas
PA Consulting (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most AI Advisory projects. Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government.
Eticas (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need ongoing monitoring of a deployed AI system. If your situation matches that, Eticas is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
PA Consulting vs Eticas FAQ
Is PA Consulting better than Eticas?
PA Consulting (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. PA Consulting's strongest advantage: long record with UK government and health clients. Eticas's strongest advantage: audits come from outside the team that built the system.
How do PA Consulting and Eticas differ in pricing?
PA Consulting's pricing: consulting fees; rates not published. Eticas's pricing: audit fees and platform subscriptions; rates on request. 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: PA Consulting or Eticas?
PA Consulting 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 PA Consulting and Eticas?
PA Consulting's primary differentiator is: advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government. Eticas's primary differentiator is: independent algorithmic audits that measure bias and accuracy in real use. They also differ in team size (~3,900 vs 11–50), minimum engagement (Not disclosed vs Not disclosed), and primary industries served (Public sector, Defense vs Public sector, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.