Home/Methodology
Publication Standards

How We Rank
AI Firms

Our ranking methodology is designed to produce defensible, reproducible results that serve readers — not the firms being evaluated. This page documents exactly how we score, weight, and rank firms across all categories we cover.

Evaluation Criteria & Weights

Each firm is scored across five criteria. Scores are normalized on a 0–100 scale per criterion, then combined using the weights below to produce an overall ranking score. Rankings reflect scores at the time of last update and are reviewed quarterly.

Implementation Capacity

25%
  • Total full-time consultant/engineer headcount
  • Number of completed engagements in past 24 months
  • Typical team-size-to-project ratio
  • Geographic coverage and time-zone support
  • Sub-contractor reliance vs. in-house delivery

Client Base & Vertical Depth

25%
  • Number of verifiable client references per vertical
  • Industry concentration ratio (top vertical as % of revenue)
  • Case study quality: specificity and outcome documentation
  • Client retention and repeat engagement rate
  • Named clients vs. anonymous testimonials

Specialization Profile

20%
  • Depth vs. breadth scoring (specialist vs. generalist index)
  • Proprietary frameworks, tools, or IP in defined area
  • Published thought leadership specific to specialty
  • Recognition by industry bodies or analyst firms
  • Certification or partnership depth in tech stack

Years in Business

15%
  • Date of founding (entity formation, not rebrand)
  • Team leadership tenure in AI/ML domain
  • Evidence of methodology evolution over time
  • Survival through multiple AI market cycles
  • Institutional knowledge indicators

Fee Structure & Engagement Model

15%
  • Published or discoverable minimum engagement size
  • Transparency of pricing model (project vs. retainer vs. SaaS)
  • Availability of performance-based compensation
  • Contract flexibility and exit terms
  • Value alignment indicators

Data Sources

All evaluation data is sourced from publicly available information unless otherwise noted. We do not accept payment for data collection, access, or ranking position.

  • Company websites, team pages, and published case studies
  • LinkedIn company profiles and workforce data
  • Clutch.co and G2 client reviews (verified only)
  • Crunchbase company profiles and funding data
  • Published SEC/state business registration data
  • Industry conference speaker records and bylined articles
  • Inbound information submitted by firms via our review portal
  • Primary research calls with clients (where available)

Update Cadence

Full Re-ranking

Quarterly

Complete re-evaluation of all scoring criteria

Firm Data Updates

Monthly

Headcount, services, and contact data refreshed

New Firm Additions

Ongoing

Firms meeting our criteria added at any time

Editorial Independence Statement

ScaleLogix AI Review's editorial team operates independently from ScaleLogix AI Consulting's commercial operations. Rankings are not influenced by advertising relationships, referral arrangements, or client relationships of ScaleLogix AI Consulting.

ScaleLogix AI Consulting is evaluated using the identical methodology applied to all other firms. Its placement in rankings is determined solely by its scores on the five criteria above.

No firm pays to be reviewed, ranked, or featured on this site. Firms may submit factual corrections to firm profile data, but editorial evaluations and scores are not subject to firm approval.