Work & Co vs Fantasy: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Work & Co (3.8/5) edges ahead of Fantasy (3.8/5) overall. Work & Co is the better choice for premium brands, design paired with strong engineering. 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.
Work & Co vs Fantasy: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Work & Co | Fantasy |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2013 | 1999 |
| HQ | Dumbo, Brooklyn, NY, USA | San Francisco, CA, USA (also New York, NY) |
| Team size | 425+ | Not published |
| Rating | 3.8 / 5 | 3.8 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | An engineering-heavy studio with a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its size, now operating inside Accenture Song | 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 |
| Pricing model | Fixed project, dedicated team | Project-based (not published) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, React, Next.js | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, Miro |
| Industries served | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility |
Work & Co vs Fantasy: overview
Work & Co
Five co-founders — Gene Liebel, Felipe Memoria, Joe Stewart, Mohan Ramaswamy, and Marcelo Eduardo — started Work & Co in May 2013 out of Dumbo, Brooklyn, and the studio has since opened offices across the US, Latin America, and Europe. What's unusual is the client list relative to headcount: Apple, IKEA, Google, Mercedes-Benz, Pfizer, GoFundMe, Nike, and Disney have all hired a studio of roughly 425 people. Work & Co is now part of Accenture Song, a detail worth surfacing alongside the design credentials.
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.
Services and capabilities: Work & Co vs Fantasy
| Capability | Work & Co | Fantasy |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✗ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✓ |
| Web development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✓ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Work & Co vs Fantasy
| Framework / platform | Work & Co | Fantasy |
|---|---|---|
| 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: Work & Co vs Fantasy
| Criterion | Work & Co | Fantasy |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Work & Co vs Fantasy
| Dimension | Work & Co | Fantasy |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare | Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Automotive & mobility |
| Best use cases | Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand, E-commerce platform rebuild requiring heavy front-end engineering | Consumer product design for an established or legacy-adjacent brand, AI feature design layered onto an existing product |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Work & Co vs Fantasy: pros and cons
| Work & Co | |
|---|---|
| + | Client roster — Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney — is exceptional relative to a roughly 425-person studio |
| + | Engineering-heavy delivery model keeps design and build under one roof, cutting hand-off risk |
| + | 425+ people across the US, Europe, and Latin America give genuine multi-region coverage |
| + | Strong track record on premium consumer digital product launches |
| - | Now part of Accenture Song, the same parent as Accenture Song's own listing here — worth noting for buyers comparing the two |
| - | Premium client roster implies premium pricing, though no minimum engagement figure is published |
| - | Less vertical specialization in fintech or healthcare than boutiques built specifically around those industries |
| 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 |
Who should choose Work & Co?
A typical fit: flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand.
An engineering-heavy studio with a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its size, now operating inside Accenture Song. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Consumer products, Enterprise transformation, Healthcare.
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.
Decision matrix: Work & Co vs Fantasy
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Work & Co |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Work & Co |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Work & Co (Not published) vs Fantasy (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Work & Co |
| 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: Work & Co vs Fantasy
| Use case | Work & Co fit | Fantasy fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Flagship consumer app redesign for a global brand | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| E-commerce platform rebuild requiring heavy front-end engineering | Strong | Limited | Work & Co |
| Consumer product design for an established or legacy-adjacent brand | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| AI feature design layered onto an existing product | Limited | Strong | Fantasy |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Work & Co vs Fantasy
Work & Co (3.8/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. An engineering-heavy studio with a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its size, now operating inside Accenture Song.
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
Work & Co vs Fantasy FAQ
Is Work & Co better than Fantasy?
Work & Co (3.8/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Work & Co's strongest advantage: client roster — Apple, IKEA, Google, Nike, Disney — is exceptional relative to a roughly 425-person studio. Fantasy's strongest advantage: independently owned since 1999, avoiding the holding-company consolidation that's absorbed several peers on this list.
How do Work & Co and Fantasy differ in pricing?
Work & Co uses fixed project, dedicated team pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Fantasy uses project-based (not published) 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: Work & Co or Fantasy?
Work & Co 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 Work & Co and Fantasy?
Work & Co's primary differentiator is: an engineering-heavy studio with a client roster (Apple, IKEA, Nike, Disney) unusually strong for its size, now operating inside Accenture Song. 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. They also differ in team size (425+ vs Not published), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer products, Enterprise transformation vs Consumer products, Enterprise transformation).
Verify all details directly with each agency before making a decision.