Your page scores 74 out of 100 for sameness against the 3 competitors you named.

Claims only you make, that buyers weigh, and that competitors can’t easily copy.

Territory you spend prominent space on that the set also occupies. Not every line is one to delete — the question is whether it has earned the space, or whether something only you can say should be there instead.

• Commodity · 100%Table stakesHero

  Large customer base and long track record

  • “160+ product teams → from Scale-ups to Fortune 500”
  • “CTOs and PMs love working with us. They stay for years”

  You say this 2 different ways.

  Netguru, STX Next and Future Processing all cover this territory. Buyers may need to hear it, but in your hero it spends the first impression on shared ground.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“2500+ Projects delivered”
  • STX Next“1000 Successful Projects”
  • Future Processing“900+ successful projects”
• Commodity · 100%Table stakesHero

  Scales delivery capacity fast with talent

  • “TSH fields a self-managed team in 2 weeks, no handholding required”
  • “We help CTOs and product teams scale fast when opportunity hits”
  • “Fill in missing talent and add the specialized skills your software development team needs without months of recruitment”

  You say this 3 different ways.

  Common ground with Netguru, STX Next and Future Processing. Say it if buyers need it — lower on the page, where it is not the thing they read first. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“400+ People on board”
  • STX Next“Team of 500+ specialized engineers”
  • Future Processing“growing from a small software house in Gliwice, Poland, into a technology consulting and software delivery partner with more than 800 specialists”
• Commodity · 67%KeepHero

  AI-first delivery using AI agents

  • “AI-native delivery, four ways”
  • “Ship faster with an AI-agentic engineering team that owns the outcome end-to-end”
  • “Quality control: 6 AI agents & fintech-native engineers”
  • “A complete AI product engineering framework”
  • “Not a prompt library”

  You say this 5 different ways.

  STX Next and Future Processing say what they are and who they are for, as every page in a category must. Keep it — it is orientation, not differentiation.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • STX Next“AI-First, Outcome-driven Technology Partner”
  • Future Processing“We proceed according to our unique AI-enabled advisory & delivery framework grounded in technological heritage and AI roots”
• Commodity · 67%Table stakesHero

  Third-party recognition and ratings

  • “4.8 / 5 impartial reviews on clutch.co”

  Netguru and Future Processing make the same claim (67% of the set). It cannot set you apart, so it should not carry the hero. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“Our current NPS score (highlighted)”
  • Future Processing“NPS on a scale from -100 to +100, a result deemed excellent for the IT sector”
• Commodity · 100%Table stakesSection

  Named client case studies as proof

  • “Bakkt built Zaira for agentic payments across 63+ countries”
  • “Emergency team augmentation for Wren Kitchens - the UK's #1 kitchen retailer”

  You say this 2 different ways.

  A buyer comparing tabs sees this on Netguru, STX Next and Future Processing. Yours earns nothing by repeating it up top; it can live lower down. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“5.0 app rating on App Store for a major sports ecommerce platform”
  • STX Next“Man Group case study: empowering smarter investment strategies”
  • Future Processing“£1B+ in bookings for the UK's largest independent broadcaster with a new ad management platform”
• Commodity · 100%Table stakesSection

  Quantified client results as proof

  • “Pension Lab slashed document processing time by 95% with an AI app”
  • “A remade backend cut eSky's time to market by 75%”
  • “Backlog creation from 1–2 days to 15 min”
  • “Context gathering from 60 min to 3 min”
  • “40% faster delivery, built in”

  You say this 5 different ways.

  Netguru, STX Next and Future Processing got here first as far as a buyer can tell. Keep the fact for readers who need it; move the position to a claim only your page can make. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“40% growth in international & GCC orders for a global retailer”
  • STX Next“Reduced unplanned downtime by 20% with Predictive Maintenance for a chemicals/plastics client”
  • Future Processing“A seamless migration and 72% cost reduction, within a 20-day timescale”
• Commodity · 100%Table stakesSection

  Security, compliance and certifications

  • “Can't compromise on quality & security standards”

  Netguru, STX Next and Future Processing make the same claim. It cannot set you apart, so it should not carry the section.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“ESG and compliance by design”
  • STX Next“ISO/IEC 27001 certified, reflecting adherence to global data security standards”
  • Future Processing“grounded in our technological expertise, governance & compliance to scale safely”
• Commodity · 100%Table stakesSection

  Speed without sacrificing quality

  • “No AI slop. No quality trade-offs”

  Shared with Netguru, STX Next and Future Processing. True of you, true of them — which is exactly why it will not decide anything.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“Leverage our design system for rapid consistency”
  • STX Next“Consistent and efficient processes always aim for the highest quality”
  • Future Processing“We continuously optimise to deliver faster”
• Commodity · 67%Table stakesSection

  Advisory: assessments and roadmaps

  • “AI-driven analysis, zero business disruption”
  • “Upgrade your platform with a clear plan for faster delivery and better performance”

  You say this 2 different ways.

  Shared with Netguru and Future Processing, 67% of the set. True of you, true of them — which is exactly why it will not decide anything. Nobody else uses your exact words, but everyone is on the ground. Nobody else makes this exact claim, but everyone occupies the territory — lead with the specific, not the generic.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“Benefit from transformation roadmaps, proven delivery governance”
  • Future Processing“We map your AI opportunities against real business value, score readiness, and hand you a GO / NO-GO roadmap”
• Commodity · 67%Table stakesSection

  Builds AI and data capabilities into products

  • “Add AI capabilities to your products and processes to enhance features, improve user experience, and optimise critical workflows”

  A buyer comparing tabs sees this on Netguru and STX Next too (67% of the set). Yours earns nothing by repeating it up top; it can live lower down.

  This is grouped wrong
  They say

  • Netguru“Boost your AI personalization, retail media and onsite ads”
  • STX Next“Use AI to turn your big data into valuable insights that reveal patterns and predictions for smarter decisions”

Sameness measures how much your claims overlap with the sites compared. It does not measure message quality or whether buyers prefer you.

AI-analyzed: an AI read each page on its own and grouped the claims that say the same thing. No score here was written by a model — every number is computed from those groupings in our own code, with the weights below.

Trusted by