Skip to content
The Algorithm
vs Infosys / HCL / Wipro×Financial Services
Why Financial Services companies switch

The Algorithm vs. Infosys / HCL / Wipro in Financial Services — Fintech

Fintechs engage Infosys, HCL, and Wipro for one reason: cost. There is a better model.

The Problem

What Infosys / HCL / Wipro gets wrong in Financial Services

Fintechs engage Infosys, HCL, and Wipro for one reason: cost. The offshore rate card is attractive when a fintech's engineering budget is constrained. The cost calculation changes when you account for the compliance architecture gaps that offshore staff augmentation produces in fintech regulatory environments — and the remediation cost when regulators or auditors identify those gaps.

AML/KYC systems built by offshore staff augmentation teams executing specifications frequently have compliance architecture gaps that are not visible in testing. The gaps appear when FinCEN regulatory updates change transaction monitoring requirements, when a state money transmission regulator requests documentation of the decisioning logic, or when an OCC examination includes a technology review. The remediation at that point is a greenfield rebuild — not a patch.

AI-driven fintech products face explainability requirements that require the engineering team to understand the regulatory framework well enough to design explainability into the model architecture from the start. Offshore engineers executing a machine learning specification provided by a compliance consultant do not produce this outcome.

Staff augmentation model — sell bodies not systems
Compliance as consulting layer, not architecture
Generalist firms without deep vertical IP
Limited proprietary compliance infrastructure
The Algorithm

What we deploy instead

Our fintech engineering teams build AML/KYC, payment processing, and credit decisioning systems with compliance architecture embedded from the first design decision. Explainability built into the model. PCI scope minimized from the first API design.

Fintech cadence: two-week sprints, production code at each milestone. Full IP transfer at close.

Compliance

SOC 2 and PCI DSS built into the architecture from day one — enforced automatically by ALICE at every commit.

Delivery

Fixed-price engagements. Production system in 8-20 weeks. No discovery phase. No change orders.

Team

Domain-qualified engineers with financial services experience. The senior engineer who scopes the engagement is the senior engineer who delivers it.

IP

Full source code and documentation transferred at close. No licensing. No managed services dependency.

Compliance

The compliance difference

AML/KYC, PCI DSS, ECOA fair lending, CCPA/GDPR, SOC 2. Fintech compliance is architecture — not a consulting overlay on offshore engineering.

soc 2
pci dss
aml kyc
ccpa
gdpr
Typical Engagement

What switching from Infosys / HCL / Wipro looks like

Fintech technology engagement: 10-18 weeks. Team: 8-14 engineers. Fixed price. Full IP transfer.

Week 1

Architecture review and scope definition. We review existing deliverables and identify gaps.

Weeks 2-4

Scope locked, team assembled, first sprint underway. Working code from week two.

Weeks 8-12

First production milestone — a working integration or system component, not a document.

Close

Full IP transfer. Source code, documentation, operational runbooks. Your team runs the system.

DECISION GUIDE

Failed Vendor Recovery Playbook

Step-by-step framework for recovering from a failed Infosys / HCL / Wipro engagement — from emergency stabilisation through full re-platforming. 4-phase playbook covering stabilise, assess, transition, and normalise.

X

Replacing Infosys / HCL / Wipro in Financial Services? We've done this before.

SOC 2-compliant financial services engineering. Fixed price. Production in 8-20 weeks.

Start the Conversation
Related
Compare
vs Infosys / HCL / Wipro
Compare
All Comparisons
Market
Financial Services — Fintech
Solution
Failed Vendor Recovery
Solution
Compliance Remediation
Get Started
Contact Us
Engage Us