Home Top Developers Blog Write For Us Write a Review Sign In Create Account Request a Quote

Cegeka

Write a Review Claim this Company
4.5/5 (7 reviews)
+4989748330 info@cegeka.com Visit Website

About Cegeka

Cegeka’s aim is to help customers survive and thrive in a world where the rules of the game are continually changing. At Cegeka they believe that great skills like understanding, flexibility and the ability to listen are just as important as knowledge and expertise. The team is focusing on the professional and flawless mobile apps that rely on the private transaction keys. Most often, the transactions like get a store and send Bitcoin.

Last updated May 13, 2026

Services

Custom Software Development Cloud Solutions Blockchain Development

Industries Served

Aerospace & Defense Legal Services Automotive Travel & Hospitality Human Resources Manufacturing Gaming & Gambling

Cegeka Reviews

Write a Review

From legacy on-premise to cloud-native in a timeline the vendor community said was impossible

Beatriz Cavalcanti / Chief Digital Officer - Cerrado Tech SA
Verified
May 04, 2026

Project summary: Lean manufacturing initiatives required real-time OEE data at the line level. Our existing systems could not provide it without significant manual aggregation.

What made the most difference in practice was the quality of the engineering judgment on this team. Not the ability to execute a specification — that is a baseline expectation. The ability to recognise when a specification was suboptimal, explain why, propose an alternative, and support the client in making a decision about it. That consultative dimension elevated the output beyond what the brief described and resulted in a product that is more fit for purpose than the one we had originally specified.

PROS

Deep domain knowledge that reduced the discovery overhead significantly, proactive risk identification before issues became incidents, delivery cadence that our stakeholders found reassuring

CONS

We underestimated the input required from our subject matter experts during the requirements phase. The team flagged this early but our resource planning did not fully reflect it — our responsibility, not theirs

4.5
Overall
4.5
Quality
5.0
Schedule
5.0
Cost
4.5
Communication
Project TypeCloud Services
IndustryManufacturing
Project Cost$50,000 to $149,999
DurationSep 2025 – Apr 2026

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Chief Digital Officer at Cerrado Tech SA I oversee technology investment and delivery across our Manufacturing operations in Brasília, Brazil. We are a commercially focused business and our technology choices are always evaluated in terms of their direct contribution to business outcomes rather than technical elegance alone.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Our platform had been maintained by a previous vendor for three years and the accumulated technical debt had reached a point where delivery velocity had dropped to a fraction of what it should have been. We needed fresh engineering expertise and a structured plan to address the underlying issues.
What services did the company provide for your project?
Primarily Cloud Services, with adjacent work in solution architecture and quality assurance. They were responsible for the full build from requirements through to go-live, including integration with four existing systems in our technology landscape. The breadth they covered without requiring additional vendors was commercially and logistically valuable.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
The quality of the questions they asked during the briefing process was the first indicator. Vendors who ask precise questions in the sales phase tend to apply the same rigour during delivery. That hypothesis proved accurate. The technical proposal was substantive, the team structure was senior throughout, and the pricing was transparent.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Thoroughly and precisely. The requirements document they produced was detailed enough that our QA team used it directly to write acceptance criteria. Every user story had a defined business objective attached. Nothing was left to interpretation. That discipline in the requirements phase paid dividends throughout development and testing.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
The project management framework was the most structured I have experienced with an external vendor. Sprint planning was tight, acceptance criteria were specific, retrospectives were honest and acted on. The project manager treated the shared backlog as a live document and the risk register as an operational tool rather than a compliance artefact. I never had to ask for a status update.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes. I had privately built a contingency expectation into my planning given the project complexity and the number of integrations involved. None of that contingency was needed. The delivery landed on the agreed date and the final invoice matched the approved budget to within a fraction of a percent. That outcome is rarer than the industry acknowledges.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
We went live four months ago. User adoption exceeded the target we had set by 23 percent in the first month. Support ticket volume has dropped measurably. The features we had deferred because the previous architecture made them prohibitively expensive to build are now in development. The platform they built has opened our roadmap.
What did you like most about working with this company?
The continuity of the team. The engineers who participated in the discovery sessions were the engineers who built the system. That consistency of institutional knowledge across a six-month project has a value that is difficult to quantify but easy to notice when it is absent. Every conversation built on the previous ones.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Yes. I would add the context that this is not the cheapest option in the market and they are selective about the engagements they take on. If your primary criterion is price, there are alternatives. If you want a technology partner who can be trusted with a complex Cloud Services programme in the Manufacturing space and will deliver against a serious brief, this is the team.

AI models that replaced guesswork with evidence in decisions that matter most

Danielle Westbrook / Chief Digital Officer - BlueSky Retail Holdings
Verified
Mar 27, 2026

Project summary: Several years of incremental development had left us with a platform that was technically functional but strategically limiting. A structured rebuild was the agreed path forward.

We had worked with three agencies before this engagement. The comparison is not flattering to the others. What distinguished this team was a systematic approach to understanding the problem before proposing a solution — something that sounds obvious and is practiced far less often than it should be. The delivery phase ran to schedule, the codebase is clean enough that our internal engineers made positive comments during handover review, and we have not logged a critical incident in five months of live operation. We intend to use them for our next phase of work.

PROS

Architectural decisions designed for longevity rather than just the current brief, thorough automated test coverage, post-launch stability that validated every technical choice made during discovery

CONS

Pipeline availability for kickoff required a few weeks of lead time — in hindsight that selection pressure means you are working with a team that is in demand for the right reasons

4.5
Overall
4.0
Quality
4.5
Schedule
4.5
Cost
4.5
Communication
Project TypeAI & Machine Learning
IndustryGaming & Gambling
Project Cost$10,000 to $49,999
DurationMar 2025 – Jan 2026

Questions & Answers

Please describe your company, your role, and the industry you operate in.
As Chief Digital Officer at BlueSky Retail Holdings I oversee technology investment and delivery across our Gaming & Gambling operations in Chicago, USA. We are a commercially focused business and our technology choices are always evaluated in terms of their direct contribution to business outcomes rather than technical elegance alone.
What specific problem or business challenge led you to hire this company?
Regulatory requirements in our Gaming & Gambling segment had changed and the compliance timeline was set by our regulator, not by us. The AI & Machine Learning changes required were significant enough to justify engaging a specialist partner rather than diverting our internal team from the product roadmap.
What services did the company provide for your project?
The scope covered the full AI & Machine Learning lifecycle: discovery and requirements definition, solution architecture, iterative development across twelve sprints, integration testing, performance validation, production deployment, and a structured four-week hypercare period. They also provided system documentation and a knowledge transfer programme for our internal team.
Why did you choose this company over other providers you considered?
A trusted peer in the Gaming & Gambling sector had used them for a comparable AI & Machine Learning engagement and their recommendation was unequivocal. Our own due diligence confirmed the pattern they described. The combination of domain knowledge, AI & Machine Learning depth, and demonstrated delivery discipline was the deciding factor.
How clearly did the company understand your requirements and business goals?
Better than we managed ourselves going in. The workshops they facilitated surfaced assumptions we had not examined and exposed three requirements that were in direct conflict with each other. Resolving those before development began saved us what would certainly have been significant rework later in the project.
How was your overall experience with their communication and project management?
Communication was proactive, timely, and appropriately calibrated. Technical updates for the engineering audience, executive summaries for the steering group, risk flags with proposed mitigations rather than just problem statements. The fortnightly sprint reviews gave our stakeholders visibility without requiring them to attend every working session.
Did the company deliver the project on time and within your expected budget?
Yes to both. There was a single sprint where a dependency on a third-party API introduced a one-week delay. The team identified it three weeks in advance, presented two mitigation options, and we agreed on an approach that recovered the schedule within the same sprint cycle. That level of foresight is what separates good project management from reactive problem management.
What tangible results or business impact have you seen since the project was completed?
The ROI case we presented to our board was conservative by design. Current performance against the financial model suggests we will hit the projected payback point in under twelve months against an eighteen-month target. The operational efficiency gains in particular have exceeded the model, in part because the quality of the data the new platform generates supports decisions that the previous system could not.
What did you like most about working with this company?
Their instinct for keeping the business objective visible throughout technical decision-making. I have worked with technically excellent teams who lose the strategic thread as complexity increases. This team maintained a clear connection between every architectural choice and the outcome we had agreed to achieve. That orientation made the trade-off conversations significantly easier.
Would you recommend this company to others, and would you work with them again?
Unreservedly. We are in active scoping conversations for a second engagement and I expect this to develop into a multi-year partnership. For any organisation in the Gaming & Gambling sector looking for AI & Machine Learning expertise combined with genuine delivery discipline, I would put this team at the top of the evaluation list.

Company Info

Founded 1992
Employees 1000+
Hourly Rate $100 - $149
Client Rating 4.5/5 (7 reviews)

Rating Breakdown

Quality
4.4
Schedule
4.6
Cost
4.6
Communication
4.4

FAQs

Does Cegeka only work locally, or take on clients elsewhere too?
Cegeka isn't necessarily limited to one region and may take on clients across several countries, including Germany, depending on market demand and business partnerships.
Is Cegeka more of an offshore setup or a local team?
That depends on where Cegeka is based and who they primarily serve — some firms like this operate fully offshore, some are local-first, and plenty run a hybrid model that mixes both. For context, it has served clients in Germany, and it has been operating since 1992.
What makes Cegeka worth considering over other options?
What tends to set Cegeka apart usually comes down to some mix of technical depth, relevant industry experience, how clients describe working with them, their development approach, communication habits, and whether they can actually deliver something that scales. Founded in 1992, the company has built a track record of delivering projects across various industries.
Has Cegeka actually shipped a SaaS product before?
It's a common line of work for a company like Cegeka — multi-tenant architecture, subscription billing hooked up properly, and cloud-native deployment built for a product meant to scale as a service rather than a one-off build. For context, it has experience across industries such as Manufacturing, Human Resources, Gaming & Gambling, Legal Services, Aerospace & Defense and Travel & Hospitality, and it has served clients in Germany.
What kinds of industries has Cegeka actually built for?
Cegeka has delivered projects across a range of different industries, including Manufacturing, Human Resources, Gaming & Gambling, Legal Services, Aerospace & Defense and Travel & Hospitality.
What are the actual contract options if I want to work with Cegeka?
Most companies structured like Cegeka give you a choice between a fixed-price contract, a dedicated team arrangement, or time-and-materials billing, so you can pick whichever lines up with your budget and how well-defined your scope already is. For context, it has experience across industries such as Manufacturing, Human Resources, Gaming & Gambling, Legal Services, Aerospace & Defense and Travel & Hospitality, and its average project cost is reported at $2500000+.
What's actually in Cegeka's technical toolkit?
The exact stack shifts by project, but Cegeka commonly works across things like React, Angular, Vue.js, Node.js, Python, .NET, Java, PHP, Flutter, React Native, native iOS and Android, and cloud platforms like AWS and Azure. For context, it has served clients in Germany, and it reports a team size of 1000+ professionals.
Would Cegeka be a good fit for an early-stage startup?
Generally, yes — companies like Cegeka tend to work well with startups because of what they typically offer: MVP builds, product strategy input, architecture that can scale later, and dedicated teams that keep costs manageable while still moving fast. For context, it has served clients in Germany, and it reports a team size of 1000+ professionals.
Roughly how long does a project with Cegeka take start to finish?
It depends heavily on scope. A lean MVP might be a matter of weeks, while a full enterprise system or a larger digital transformation project can stretch into months once you factor in development, testing, and deployment. With a team of 1000+ professionals, Cegeka can scale resources based on project urgency.

Similar Companies

Nearby Companies