Projects by IF vs The Gradient: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
The Gradient (4.2/5) edges ahead of Projects by IF (4.0/5) overall. The Gradient is the better choice for Fintech, healthcare, retail — AI-native, limited roster. Projects by IF is the stronger option for Tech/public-sector, trust- and policy-aware design. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Projects by IF vs The Gradient: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Projects by IF | The Gradient |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2016 | 2016 |
| HQ | London, UK | Lviv, Ukraine |
| Team size | Not published | 11–50 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government | A deliberately small, AI-native firm with a notable client list (Qatar Airways, Philips, Daimler AG) unusual for its self-limited scale |
| Pricing model | Project-based (not published) | Fixed project, retainer |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Miro, Adobe Creative Suite | Figma, Adobe Creative Suite, Design systems/Storybook |
| Industries served | Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, E-commerce / retail |
Projects by IF vs The Gradient: overview
Projects by IF
Sarah Gold founded Projects by IF in London in 2016, building a strategic design practice around a specific problem: helping technology-enabled organizations design for trust at scale. That focus — spanning product and experience design, digital strategy, regulation and policy work, and technology architecture — has produced client relationships with Google, the UK Government, and Blue Cross Blue Shield, an unusual combination of big tech and public-sector work for a studio this size.
The Gradient
The Gradient doesn't publish a confirmed founding year, though its 55 Clutch reviews imply several years of delivery history; 2016 is used here as an estimate consistent with that track record. Based in Lviv, Ukraine, the firm keeps itself intentionally small — 11–50 people — a self-imposed cap it frames as necessary to keep senior attention on every engagement rather than scaling into account-management layers. Client names include Qatar Airways, Philips, Daimler AG, and Dubai Financial Market, an unusually strong list for a firm operating at this size, built around an explicitly AI-native design practice.
Services and capabilities: Projects by IF vs The Gradient
| Capability | Projects by IF | The Gradient |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✓ |
| Branding | ✗ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Projects by IF vs The Gradient
| Framework / platform | Projects by IF | The Gradient |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | N/A | N/A |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| Framer | N/A | N/A |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | ✓ |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | ✓ |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Projects by IF vs The Gradient
| Criterion | Projects by IF | The Gradient |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Fixed project, Retainer |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Projects by IF vs The Gradient
| Dimension | Projects by IF | The Gradient |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech | Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, E-commerce / retail |
| Best use cases | Public-sector or government digital service design, Trust-and-safety product design for a technology platform | AI-native product design for a fintech or healthcare platform, Retail digital product design for an established brand |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Projects by IF vs The Gradient: pros and cons
| Projects by IF | |
|---|---|
| + | Purpose-built around trust and regulation-aware design, a genuine specialty few boutiques on this list offer |
| + | Client list combines big tech (Google) with public-sector work (UK Government), demonstrating range within its niche |
| + | Founder-led since 2016 under CEO Sarah Gold, giving a consistent point of view across engagements |
| + | Services span product design through policy and regulatory design, useful for regulated or public-facing products |
| - | Team size isn't published in available sources, making capacity planning harder for large programs |
| - | Trust-and-policy specialization is a narrower fit for clients wanting pure visual or brand design |
| - | Pricing and minimum engagement size aren't published |
| The Gradient | |
|---|---|
| + | Notable client list (Qatar Airways, Philips, Daimler AG, Dubai Financial Market) is strong for a deliberately small firm |
| + | AI-native positioning is a genuine differentiator versus generalist product design shops |
| + | Deliberately limits its client roster, which the firm frames as preserving senior attention per project |
| + | 55 Clutch reviews imply a substantial track record despite the unconfirmed founding year |
| - | Founding year is not confirmed in available sources beyond an implied multi-year track record |
| - | Deliberately small team (11–50) by design limits capacity for very large or multi-workstream programs |
| - | Minimum engagement is not published, requiring a direct conversation for budget planning |
Who should choose Projects by IF?
A typical fit: public-sector or government digital service design.
A design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Enterprise transformation, Healthcare, Financial services / fintech.
Who should choose The Gradient?
A typical fit: AI-native product design for a fintech or healthcare platform.
A deliberately small, AI-native firm with a notable client list (Qatar Airways, Philips, Daimler AG) unusual for its self-limited scale. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in Financial services / fintech, Healthcare, E-commerce / retail.
Decision matrix: Projects by IF vs The Gradient
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Projects by IF |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Projects by IF (Not published) vs The Gradient (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Projects by IF |
| 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: Projects by IF vs The Gradient
| Use case | Projects by IF fit | The Gradient fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Public-sector or government digital service design | Strong | Limited | Projects by IF |
| Trust-and-safety product design for a technology platform | Strong | Limited | Projects by IF |
| AI-native product design for a fintech or healthcare platform | Limited | Strong | The Gradient |
| Retail digital product design for an established brand | Limited | Strong | The Gradient |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Projects by IF vs The Gradient
The Gradient (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. A deliberately small, AI-native firm with a notable client list (Qatar Airways, Philips, Daimler AG) unusual for its self-limited scale.
Projects by IF (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need trust-and-safety product design for a technology platform. If your situation matches that, Projects by IF is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Projects by IF vs The Gradient FAQ
Is Projects by IF better than The Gradient?
The Gradient (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Projects by IF's strongest advantage: purpose-built around trust and regulation-aware design, a genuine specialty few boutiques on this list offer. The Gradient's strongest advantage: notable client list (Qatar Airways, Philips, Daimler AG, Dubai Financial Market) is strong for a deliberately small firm.
How do Projects by IF and The Gradient differ in pricing?
Projects by IF uses project-based (not published) pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. The Gradient uses fixed project, retainer 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: Projects by IF or The Gradient?
The Gradient 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 Projects by IF and The Gradient?
Projects by IF's primary differentiator is: a design practice built specifically around trust, regulation, and policy work for technology-enabled organizations, with clients spanning Google to the UK Government. The Gradient's primary differentiator is: a deliberately small, AI-native firm with a notable client list (Qatar Airways, Philips, Daimler AG) unusual for its self-limited scale. They also differ in team size (Not published vs 11–50), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Enterprise transformation, Healthcare vs Financial services / fintech, Healthcare).
Verify all details directly with each firm before making a decision.