Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Bakken & Bæck (4.2/5) edges ahead of Fantasy (3.8/5) overall. Bakken & Bæck is the better choice for tech companies (AI, decentralized systems), design plus research. Fantasy is the stronger option for Consumer/tech brands, independent studio, growing AI practice. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Fantasy | Bakken & Bæck |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1999 | 2011 |
| HQ | San Francisco, CA, USA (also New York, NY) | Oslo, Norway (also Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bonn, and London) |
| Team size | Not published | 70+ |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Stayed independently owned for over two decades while most agencies its size sold to a holding company — with a client list (Nike, Disney, Spotify) to match the larger names on this list | A five-city European studio that blends design with genuine computer-science research depth, evidenced by recent AI work for Sierra and Coinbase |
| Pricing model | Project-based (not published) | Fixed project, dedicated team |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, Miro | Figma, React, Next.js |
| Industries served | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility | SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products |
Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck: overview
Fantasy
Fantasy — originally Fantasy Interactive — has operated independently since 1999 out of studios in San Francisco and New York, which alone sets it apart from most large agencies on this list that have since been folded into a holding company. Its client history reads like a highlight reel: Nike, Disney, Microsoft, Netflix, Spotify, Ford, Google, and Samsung, with more recent work for 23andMe and Rokid. The studio has leaned increasingly into AI-native product design in recent years, positioning itself at the intersection of AI, product strategy, and human-centered design across categories from automotive to wearables.
Bakken & Bæck
Johan Bakken and Tobias Bæck founded Bakken & Bæck in 2011, and the studio now works from Oslo, Amsterdam, Barcelona, Bonn, and London with a 70-person team that mixes multiple computer-science PhDs into its design and engineering practice. Recent work includes shaping conversational AI products with Sierra and building decentralized platforms with Coinbase, alongside clients like IKEA and Norwegian payments app Vipps. The studio positions itself around building digital products end to end — from early exploration through launch — rather than a single design phase.
Services and capabilities: Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck
| Capability | Fantasy | Bakken & Bæck |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✓ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✓ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck
| Framework / platform | Fantasy | Bakken & Bæck |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | N/A | ✓ |
| Framer | ✓ | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck
| Criterion | Fantasy | Bakken & Bæck |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck
| Dimension | Fantasy | Bakken & Bæck |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility | SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products |
| Best use cases | Consumer product design for an established or legacy-adjacent brand, AI feature design layered onto an existing product | AI or conversational-product design for a fast-moving startup, Decentralized or crypto platform design and build |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck: pros and cons
| Fantasy | |
|---|---|
| + | Independently owned since 1999, avoiding the holding-company consolidation that's absorbed several peers on this list |
| + | Client history spans Nike, Disney, Microsoft, Netflix, and Spotify — a roster on par with much larger agencies |
| + | Increasingly positioned around AI-native product design, not just legacy interface work |
| + | Two studio locations (San Francisco, New York) support both coasts without a large global footprint to manage |
| - | Team size isn't published, making it hard to judge delivery capacity against studios that disclose headcount |
| - | Marquee client list suggests enterprise-level pricing, though no minimum engagement is published |
| - | Recent AI-native repositioning means less of a public track record in that specific specialization than its legacy design work |
| Bakken & Bæck | |
|---|---|
| + | 70-person team spans five European cities, giving real multi-market coverage |
| + | Combines design with computer-science research depth, unusual among boutique product studios |
| + | Recent, high-profile AI and crypto/fintech work (Sierra, Coinbase) demonstrates currency in fast-moving categories |
| + | Client list also includes established consumer brands like IKEA, broadening its portfolio beyond pure tech |
| - | Minimum engagement size and pricing model aren't published, making early budgeting harder |
| - | European-only office footprint may mean less overlap with US business hours for some clients |
| - | AI/crypto-forward recent portfolio may read as a narrower fit for clients outside technology-heavy categories |
Who should choose Fantasy?
A typical fit: consumer product design for an established or legacy-adjacent brand.
Stayed independently owned for over two decades while most agencies its size sold to a holding company — with a client list (Nike, Disney, Spotify) to match the larger names on this list. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility.
Who should choose Bakken & Bæck?
A typical fit: AI or conversational-product design for a fast-moving startup.
A five-city European studio that blends design with genuine computer-science research depth, evidenced by recent AI work for Sierra and Coinbase. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products.
Decision matrix: Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Fantasy |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Bakken & Bæck |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Fantasy (Not published) vs Bakken & Bæck (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Fantasy |
| 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: Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck
| Use case | Fantasy fit | Bakken & Bæck fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Consumer product design for an established or legacy-adjacent brand | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| AI feature design layered onto an existing product | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| AI or conversational-product design for a fast-moving startup | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Decentralized or crypto platform design and build | Limited | Strong | Bakken & Bæck |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck
Bakken & Bæck (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A five-city European studio that blends design with genuine computer-science research depth, evidenced by recent AI work for Sierra and Coinbase.
Fantasy (3.8/5) is worth a look if you need AI feature design layered onto an existing product. If your situation matches that, Fantasy is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Fantasy vs Bakken & Bæck FAQ
Is Fantasy better than Bakken & Bæck?
Bakken & Bæck (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Fantasy's strongest advantage: independently owned since 1999, avoiding the holding-company consolidation that's absorbed several peers on this list. Bakken & Bæck's strongest advantage: 70-person team spans five European cities, giving real multi-market coverage.
How do Fantasy and Bakken & Bæck differ in pricing?
Fantasy uses project-based (not published) pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Bakken & Bæck uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Fantasy or Bakken & Bæck?
Bakken & Bæck 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 Fantasy and Bakken & Bæck?
Fantasy's primary differentiator is: stayed independently owned for over two decades while most agencies its size sold to a holding company — with a client list (Nike, Disney, Spotify) to match the larger names on this list. Bakken & Bæck's primary differentiator is: a five-city European studio that blends design with genuine computer-science research depth, evidenced by recent AI work for Sierra and Coinbase. They also differ in team size (Not published vs 70+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer products, Enterprise transformation vs SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.