Best EY alternatives in 2026

KPMG was formed in 1987 through the merger of Peat Marwick International and Klynveld Main Goerdeler, and its member firms employ around 275,000 people. In December 2025 KPMG International announced ISO/IEC 42001 certification for its own AI management system, audited by Schellman; member firms in Australia, Spain, India, and the US had certified earlier. Its Trusted AI approach covers governance design, risk classification under the EU AI Act, controls testing, and assurance. For a CFO or chief risk officer who needs advice that an audit committee will accept, few firms have a larger bench. Auditor-independence rules can bar it from advising its own audit clients. Check that first.

How it differs from EY: Governance and assurance depth, backed by its own ISO/IEC 42001-certified AI management system. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, KPMG is better for regulated firms needing audit-grade AI governance.

Tensorway is a Spanish AI firm founded in 2019 in Alicante, with a team of more than 50 and advisers who come from a software engineering lineage stretching back more than twenty years. Each candidate use case gets two interviews: one with the person who proposed it and one with the person who actually does the work, since their accounts often differ. Then the data behind each case is traced, costed, and classified under the EU AI Act. The output includes run cost at expected volume, a build sequence with cost per stage, and a list of use cases to drop, each with a reason. The roadmap is written so an internal team or another vendor can implement it, and Tensorway will say so when the honest answer is not to build AI at all. Among its anonymized clients is a German enterprise that used its help to organize more than 200 EU policies (per company website; independently unverifiable).

How it differs from EY: Two-interview method per use case, a written drop list, and a roadmap another vendor can implement. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Tensorway is better for COOs and CFOs wanting a vendor-neutral AI plan.

PwC's network took its current form through a 1998 merger and today employs roughly 370,000 people. Its Responsible AI practice, led in Germany by partner Hendrik Reese, helps clients inventory and classify AI systems, run gap analyses, and plan compliance across the EU AI Act, DORA, GDPR, and NIS2. Standards work covers ISO/IEC 42001 and the NIST AI Risk Management Framework. PwC also tests client chatbots for accuracy and bias, an early step toward formal AI assurance. Like the other Big Four, it sells delivery as well as advice.

How it differs from EY: EU AI Act compliance planned alongside DORA, GDPR, and NIS2 in one program. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, PwC is better for multinationals mapping AI Act duties with other EU rules.

appliedAI grew out of UnternehmerTUM, the entrepreneurship center linked to the Technical University of Munich, in 2017, and has run as a joint venture with the Innovation Park Artificial Intelligence in Heilbronn since 2022. It has two parts: appliedAI Initiative GmbH, which advises and trains companies, and the non-profit appliedAI Institute for Europe, which publishes on AI regulation and how to put the AI Act into practice. Directory estimates put the company at around 120 people. German industrial firms use it for readiness, governance, and training more than for large builds.

How it differs from EY: Advice from a German AI ecosystem with a non-profit institute focused on AI Act practice. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, appliedAI is better for german industrial firms seeking neutral AI guidance.

With more than 460,000 people and roots in an 1845 London accounting practice, Deloitte has the widest reach of any firm on this list. Its AI advisory sits next to risk and regulatory teams, which helps banks, insurers, and health systems that must document how each model is governed. Deliverables tend to be thorough and heavy. Expect large teams, long timelines, and a natural path into Deloitte's own implementation work.

How it differs from EY: Regulatory and audit teams beside the AI advisers, with global reach. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Deloitte is better for large regulated groups needing documented AI controls.

Trilateral Research was established in 2004 and is headquartered in London, with an Irish operations center in Waterford. It began in research and data protection and now advises on responsible AI, including fundamental rights impact assessments of the kind the EU AI Act requires for some high-risk deployments. Directory estimates of its size range from about 55 to 200 people. It also builds its own ethical AI software, mostly for public-sector and law-enforcement users.

How it differs from EY: Fundamental rights and ethics impact assessments from a research-led firm. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Trilateral Research is better for public bodies needing rights and ethics assessments.

DAIN Studios has worked from Helsinki, Berlin, and Munich since 2016 and has around 80 people. Körber, the German technology group, has held a majority stake since December 2021, though DAIN keeps its own brand. Most of its work is advice: readiness reviews, data and AI strategy, and governance set up so the client's team can run it afterward. Northern European companies that don't want a build contract attached to their plan are its core market.

How it differs from EY: Governance and readiness work designed to be run by the client's own team. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, DAIN Studios is better for nordic and DACH firms wanting governance they own.

Since its founding in Paris in 2014, Artefact has grown to more than 1,700 people in 25 countries. Cinven bought a majority stake in 2025 at a valuation above €1 billion, and the firm plans to triple in size by 2030, partly through acquisitions. Its advisory partners handle data governance and AI planning for large consumer brands. The same firm then builds, which is efficient but less neutral than a pure adviser.

How it differs from EY: Data governance and AI planning with engineers in the same firm. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Artefact is better for large consumer brands across European markets.

Gartner was founded in 1979, is based in Stamford, Connecticut, and has around 21,000 employees. It sells research subscriptions and analyst access, and it doesn't implement anything, so its advice on AI vendors, build-or-buy choices, and governance carries no delivery sale. There is a catch. Technology vendors are also Gartner clients, and the advice is general research applied to your case more than a bespoke plan. CDOs and CIOs use it most for vendor selection and benchmarking.

How it differs from EY: Analyst advice on AI vendors and governance with no implementation work to sell. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Gartner is better for CIOs and CDOs choosing AI vendors.

TÜV SÜD traces its history to 1866 and is headquartered in Munich, with around 28,000 employees worldwide. It tests and certifies products, and its AI services assess whether a defined AI system meets EU AI Act requirements and related standards. The TÜV AI.Lab built an AI Risk Navigator that sorts systems into the Act's risk classes, and TÜV SÜD has launched a test mark for low-risk AI. It assesses instead of designing strategy, which makes it a useful independent check on someone else's work.

How it differs from EY: Independent testing and certification of AI systems against EU AI Act requirements. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, TÜV SÜD is better for firms wanting an independent AI Act assessment.

BABL AI was founded in 2018 in Iowa City by astrophysicist turned auditor Shea Brown, a founding member of the International Association of Algorithmic Auditors. It runs independent, criteria-based audits and certifications, starting with automated hiring tools and now covering EU AI Act risk management. It also trains auditors through its own courses. The firm is small, and its strength is a clean separation between whoever built the system and whoever checks it.

How it differs from EY: Criteria-based third-party AI audits, separate from any design or build work. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, BABL AI is better for companies needing an independent third-party AI audit.

Founded in Paris in 1999, Sia Partners now has roughly 3,500 consultants in about 20 countries. Its regulatory practices in energy, utilities, banking, and insurance carry over naturally to AI governance. The firm also sells Heka.ai, a catalog of AI software products, which can speed early results but makes its tool advice less neutral. It suits companies that want management consultants first and technologists second.

How it differs from EY: Sector regulatory practices applied to AI governance, plus its own Heka.ai tools. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Sia Partners is better for utilities and insurers wanting regulatory-minded advice.

BearingPoint is headquartered in Amsterdam, has about 6,200 employees, and passed €1 billion in annual revenue in 2023. Its consulting unit handles advisory work, while a separate solutions business sells regulatory reporting and analytics tools. Recent AI work includes an agentic AI project in financial crime prevention for Danske Bank. Expect a European consultancy that is comfortable with regulators and runs AI advice on a fairly traditional consulting model.

How it differs from EY: European consulting with regulatory technology products from the same group. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, BearingPoint is better for european banks pairing AI with regulatory reporting.

PA Consulting started in 1943 as Personnel Administration and is now a London-based firm with about 3,900 employees and £753 million in 2024 revenue. Jacobs has owned 65% since 2021, with staff holding the rest. Its AI advice tends to come from teams that also design and build products, especially for government, defense, and health clients in the UK and Nordics. That makes the advice practical, though rarely independent of a build.

How it differs from EY: Advice from teams that also design and build, strong in UK government. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, PA Consulting is better for UK public bodies wanting advice plus delivery.

Zühlke was founded in Switzerland in 1968, is headquartered in Schlieren near Zurich, and is owned by its partners. Directory figures put it at about 1,600 people across Europe and Asia. Its data and AI consultants work on strategy, governance, and responsible AI, mostly for health and financial clients, and the same firm builds the resulting systems. Partner ownership means no private equity or parent company is pushing a sales agenda.

How it differs from EY: Partner-owned advisory and engineering for regulated health and finance work. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Zühlke is better for swiss and European health and finance firms.

ML6 has been building AI in Ghent since 2013 and employs 140+ people in Belgium, Germany, and the Netherlands. Its strategy work covers ambition-setting workshops, use-case discovery, and EU AI Act questions, and OpenAI named it a services partner in June 2025. Most clients go on to build with ML6, so the advice is grounded in engineering reality but not neutral about who builds.

How it differs from EY: Use-case discovery from engineers who also handle EU AI Act requirements. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, ML6 is better for benelux firms wanting advice from builders.

Eticas was founded by Gemma Galdon-Clavell, who led it from research on surveillance and urban policy into algorithmic auditing. A 2019 profile put the team at about 30 people, and current directory estimates range from 11 to 50. Its audits trace the rules behind a system, measure disparate impact on specific groups, and check accuracy in operation, while its ITACA platform adds ongoing monitoring. The firm checks AI that already exists rather than planning new programs.

How it differs from EY: Independent algorithmic audits that measure bias and accuracy in real use. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Eticas is better for public bodies auditing deployed algorithms.

Advai was founded in London in 2020 and has somewhere between 20 and 30 staff. It tests AI systems for robustness, benchmarks them, and monitors them, and its guardrail framework for large language models is listed in the UK government's AI assurance techniques catalogue. In December 2025 the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) named it the technical partner for its AI Live Testing pilot with financial firms. Its work is technical testing more than strategy.

How it differs from EY: Technical robustness testing, chosen by the FCA as partner for its AI Live Testing pilot. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Advai is better for UK financial firms testing AI before launch.

Futurice was founded in Helsinki in 2000 and says it has more than 800 people across Europe. Its strategy and renewal team runs AI strategy and operating-model work with executives, and design teams shape how people will actually use the result. Engineering follows if the client wants it. The approach suits Nordic companies that see AI as a service-design problem as much as a technical one.

How it differs from EY: AI strategy combined with service design and operating-model work. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Futurice is better for nordic firms redesigning services around AI.

Knowit was established in 1990, has been listed in Stockholm since 1997, and employs about 3,600 people, mostly in Sweden, Norway, Denmark, and Finland. Its AI work spans strategy, data governance, and engineering, with a large public-sector client base. Revenue fell in 2024 and 2025 and the company has focused on efficiency, which buyers may notice in staffing. It is a familiar choice for Nordic authorities that want a local partner.

How it differs from EY: Nordic public-sector reach with data governance and AI under one roof. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Knowit is better for nordic public authorities wanting a local partner.

Saidot was founded in 2018 by Meeri Haataja and is based in the Helsinki area, with a team of roughly 20. It sells an AI governance platform for inventories, risk assessment, and regulatory tracking, plus the advisory help to set it up. A seed round of €1.75 million in 2023 and a 2024 partnership with Microsoft to integrate with Azure AI support it, and the Scottish Government is among its clients. Buyers get software first; the advice comes with it.

How it differs from EY: Governance software for AI inventories and risk tracking, integrated with Azure AI. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Saidot is better for teams wanting AI inventory software with setup help.

West Monroe has operated from Chicago since 2002, has about 2,250 people, and is partly employee-owned. A chief AI officer joined in September 2025, and in June 2026 it launched WestMonroe.ai, a set of on-demand AI agents. Its advisory starts from operations and cost, which COOs tend to like. European regulation is a thinner part of its practice.

How it differs from EY: Operations and cost-led AI advice from a partly employee-owned firm. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, West Monroe is better for US COOs targeting operating-cost gains.

Elder Research has advised on analytics since 1995 from Charlottesville, Virginia, and has around 170 staff. ManTech, owned by Carlyle, bought it in December 2025. Its readiness work rests on decades of hands-on modeling, so its view on whether your data can support a use case is grounded in practice. European regulation is outside its usual territory.

How it differs from EY: Feasibility calls grounded in three decades of hands-on modeling. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Elder Research is better for US agencies wanting a data feasibility check.

Ekimetrics has worked from Paris since 2006 and has more than 400 data scientists and consultants. Its advice centers on measurable return: marketing mix, customer value, and sustainability metrics. That focus helps a CFO judge AI spending, though it covers a narrower field than a general advisory firm. It bought customer analytics company Actable in February 2026.

How it differs from EY: Return-on-investment measurement for marketing and sustainability AI. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Ekimetrics is better for CFOs who want AI tied to measured returns.

Slalom has more than 10,000 employees in over 50 offices and was founded in Seattle in 2001. Its AI and data strategists work on governance and operating models, and a new chief AI officer arrived in August 2026. Close ties with the major cloud and data vendors mean its advice usually points toward those platforms.

How it differs from EY: Local-office consultants for AI governance and operating models. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Slalom is better for north American firms wanting local consultants.

Thoughtworks has around 10,000 people and has been based in Chicago since 1993. Apax took it private in a deal announced in August 2024, and a 2026 joint venture with New York advisory firm Teneo aims to strengthen its business advice. Its own advice is strongest on software and data foundations, and its public Technology Radar shows how it judges tools before you hire it.

How it differs from EY: Public Technology Radar and engineering-led build-or-buy advice. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Thoughtworks is better for CTOs judging build-or-buy on AI tooling.

Centric Consulting is a remote-first firm founded in 1999, headquartered in Dayton, Ohio, with about 1,400 people in the US and India. Its AI advice centers on acceptable-use policies for generative AI, AI centers of excellence, and staff adoption. That suits mid-size US companies that need rules and training before any big program.

How it differs from EY: Acceptable-use policies and staff adoption programs for generative AI. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Centric Consulting is better for mid-size US firms writing AI usage policies.

RTS Labs, near Richmond, Virginia, says it has 100+ US-based staff (per company website; independently unverifiable); it gives 2010 as its founding year while Clutch lists 2012. Its advice comes as feasibility studies and proofs of concept with a return-on-investment check, instead of roadmaps. Clutch lists $25–$49 an hour and a $5,000+ minimum, the cheapest way on this page to test whether one idea works.

How it differs from EY: The cheapest entry point here, with feasibility tests in place of strategy decks. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, RTS Labs is better for small US firms testing one idea cheaply.

Future Processing, founded in Gliwice in 2000 with 250 to 999 employees per Clutch, splits its AI work evenly between consulting and development, each about a tenth of the business. Clutch named it a 2026 Top AI Strategy Company and lists $50–$99 an hour with a $25,000+ minimum. For a European mid-size company that wants a readiness check at Central European rates, it's a reasonable start.

How it differs from EY: AI readiness checks at published Central European rates. While EY excels at AI risk work folded into existing technology risk and controls programs, Future Processing is better for european mid-size firms on a modest budget.