Clay vs UXDA: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
UXDA (4.3/5) edges ahead of Clay (4.0/5) overall. UXDA is the better choice for banks and fintech, exclusively financial-services UX. Clay is the stronger option for B2B SaaS, AI, fintech — big-tech credibility, low profile. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Clay vs UXDA: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Clay | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2015 | 2015 |
| HQ | San Francisco, CA, USA | Riga, Latvia |
| Team size | Boutique-to-mid (unconfirmed; not published by the company) | 25+ |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | An unusually large enterprise client roster (Coinbase, Meta, Google, Slack) for a studio that doesn't publish its own founding year or team size | The only studio on this list built exclusively around financial-services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries |
| Pricing model | Fixed project | Fixed project, retainer |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Framer, Webflow | Figma, Sketch, Design systems/Storybook |
| Industries served | SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products | Financial services / fintech |
Clay vs UXDA: overview
Clay
Clay — clay.global, not to be confused with the unrelated AI sales-data company at clay.com — keeps an unusually low public profile for a studio whose client list includes Coinbase, Uber, SendGrid, MoneyLion, Meta, Google, Slack, Snapchat, Amazon, Toyota, and Samsung. Neither its founding year nor its team size is published or independently confirmed, which is itself worth flagging to prospective clients doing due diligence. What is clear from its portfolio is deep, repeated experience across B2B, SaaS, AI, and fintech product design, based out of San Francisco with significant NYC-based client work.
UXDA
Alex Kreger co-founded UXDA (Financial UX Design) in 2015, building a deliberately narrow practice from Riga, Latvia, with a 25-person multidisciplinary team. A decade in, UXDA has shaped or governed 150+ banking and fintech digital platforms across 39 countries — a level of single-vertical repetition none of the generalist studios on this list can claim. There's no branding or consumer-product work here; every engagement is financial-services UX.
Services and capabilities: Clay vs UXDA
| Capability | Clay | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✓ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Clay vs UXDA
| Framework / platform | Clay | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | ✓ | N/A |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| Framer | ✓ | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | ✓ |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Clay vs UXDA
| Criterion | Clay | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Clay vs UXDA
| Dimension | Clay | UXDA |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products | Financial services / fintech |
| Best use cases | AI or fintech product design for a Series A-C startup, Consumer app design for a high-growth B2B SaaS brand | Bank digital platform redesign, Fintech app UX for a regulated market |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Clay vs UXDA: pros and cons
| Clay | |
|---|---|
| + | Client list — Coinbase, Uber, Meta, Google, Slack, Snapchat, Amazon — is exceptional for a studio that doesn't publish its own size |
| + | Deep, repeated experience across B2B, SaaS, AI, and fintech product design |
| + | San Francisco base with substantial NYC-based client engagement history |
| + | Combines UX, branding, and web/product design under one team |
| - | Founding year isn't published or independently confirmed by any source outside the company |
| - | Team size isn't published either, making capacity planning harder for larger programs |
| - | Easily confused online with the unrelated AI company Clay (clay.com) — confirm you're looking at clay.global |
| UXDA | |
|---|---|
| + | Exclusive financial-services focus builds deep domain expertise generalist studios can't match |
| + | 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries over a decade |
| + | A small, senior 25-person team keeps relationships direct rather than layered through account management |
| + | A decade of single-vertical operation compounds domain knowledge project over project |
| - | Exclusive fintech focus is a liability for any client outside financial services |
| - | $30K minimum engagement (per company website; independently unverifiable) runs high for a 25-person boutique |
| - | Small team size caps capacity for very large, multi-workstream programs |
Who should choose Clay?
A typical fit: AI or fintech product design for a Series A-C startup.
An unusually large enterprise client roster (Coinbase, Meta, Google, Slack) for a studio that doesn't publish its own founding year or team size. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products.
Who should choose UXDA?
A typical fit: bank digital platform redesign.
The only studio on this list built exclusively around 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: Clay vs UXDA
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Clay |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Clay (Not published) vs UXDA ($30K (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Clay |
| 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: Clay vs UXDA
| Use case | Clay fit | UXDA fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI or fintech product design for a Series A-C startup | Strong | Limited | Clay |
| Consumer app design for a high-growth B2B SaaS brand | Strong | Limited | Clay |
| Bank digital platform redesign | Limited | Strong | UXDA |
| Fintech app UX for a regulated market | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Clay vs UXDA
UXDA (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. The only studio on this list built exclusively around financial-services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries.
Clay (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need consumer app design for a high-growth B2B SaaS brand. If your situation matches that, Clay is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Clay vs UXDA FAQ
Is Clay better than UXDA?
UXDA (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Clay's strongest advantage: client list — Coinbase, Uber, Meta, Google, Slack, Snapchat, Amazon — is exceptional for a studio that doesn't publish its own size. UXDA's strongest advantage: exclusive financial-services focus builds deep domain expertise generalist studios can't match.
How do Clay and UXDA differ in pricing?
Clay uses fixed project 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: Clay 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 agency before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Clay and UXDA?
Clay's primary differentiator is: an unusually large enterprise client roster (Coinbase, Meta, Google, Slack) for a studio that doesn't publish its own founding year or team size. UXDA's primary differentiator is: the only studio on this list built exclusively around financial-services UX, with 150+ banking and fintech platforms shaped across 39 countries. They also differ in team size (Boutique-to-mid (unconfirmed; not published by the company) vs 25+), minimum engagement (Not published vs $30K (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech vs Financial services / fintech).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.