Conscensia

conscensia.com · 22 vendors

Resilience scores

Technology vendors

Insights

Last updated 2026-06-18 · revision 1

22 direct vendors, 266 subvendors

Direct vendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Subvendors by controlling owner country (sample)

Migration Readiness: 9/10

Assessed by AI based on technology stack characteristics (cloud-native vs legacy, containerization, microservices), regulatory environment, data residency requirements, financial stability, and vendor lock-in risks. The score ranges from 0-10, where higher scores indicate better readiness for technology migration.

Conscensia exhibits a very high level of migration readiness, largely due to its advanced and cloud-native oriented technology stack. The 'Key Technologies' explicitly list major cloud platforms (AWS, Azure, GCP), containerization technologies (Docker, Kubernetes), and microservices-friendly frameworks, indicating a strong capability to develop and migrate applications to modern cloud environments. Their service offerings also include 'IT Operations and IT Maintenance' with a focus on 'cloud migration', directly demonstrating expertise and experience in this domain. While the data on 'Total Vendors' is contradictory (listed as 0, but with detailed vendor geographic diversity), assuming the 'Vendor Geographic Diversity' across 11 unique countries is indicative of their vendor landscape, it suggests a broad ecosystem that would generally reduce vendor lock-in and simplify migration efforts. The absence of specified data residency requirements and a detailed regulatory environment simplifies the planning phase, though these could become factors if specific requirements emerge. The primary limitation in this assessment is the lack of financial stability data (revenue concentration, growth history), which would typically inform the company's capacity to fund significant migration initiatives. Despite this, the technical prowess and explicit service offerings position Conscensia as highly ready for digital migration.

Compliance

9 in-scope frameworks identified; showing 3.

ISO 27001 (source) — Assessment Required

ISO 27001 certification is highly relevant for Conscensia as an IT nearshoring provider handling client codebases, intellectual property, and potentially sensitive data across three countries. The risk is Medium because: (1) clients in defence, healthcare, banking, and energy sectors typically mandate ISO 27001 certification in vendor contracts; (2) no ISO 27001 certificate has been found publicly, which is a gap for a company of this profile; (3) ISO 27001 is increasingly required under NIS2 supply chain security provisions; (4) operating across Denmark, Poland, and Ukraine with ~280 employees creates a complex information security perimeter requiring formal ISMS governance. Risk is not High because ISO 27001 is voluntary, but the absence of certification creates reputational and contractual risk with enterprise clients.

Evidence: https://conscensia.com/privacy-policy/, https://conscensia.com/about-us/, https://www.iso.org/isoiec-27001-information-security.html

SOC 2 (source) — Assessment Required

SOC 2 is highly relevant for Conscensia as an IT services and nearshoring provider. Clients in regulated sectors (banking: Spar Nord, Saxo; healthcare: Systematic, Getinge; energy: Kamstrup; defence) routinely require their IT service providers to hold SOC 2 Type II reports as evidence of security, availability, and confidentiality controls. The risk is Medium because: (1) without SOC 2 certification, Conscensia may face competitive disadvantage or contract loss with enterprise clients; (2) clients in financial services (Saxo, Spar Nord) are subject to DORA (Digital Operational Resilience Act) and will require third-party ICT providers to demonstrate robust controls; (3) no SOC 2 report has been found publicly, which is a gap for an IT services company of this profile. The risk is not High because SOC 2 is voluntary (not legally mandated in the EU), but market and contractual pressure makes it practically important.

Evidence: https://conscensia.com/services/, https://conscensia.com/cases/, https://www.aicpa-cima.com/resources/landing/soc-2

Polish Personal Data Protection Act — Assessment Required

Conscensia operates a tech hub in Warsaw, Poland, employing Polish staff. Poland's Personal Data Protection Act (implementing GDPR) and the oversight of UODO (Urząd Ochrony Danych Osobowych — Polish DPA) apply to Conscensia's Polish operations. Risk is Medium because: (1) UODO has been active in enforcement, issuing fines to Polish entities; (2) employee data processing in Poland must comply with both GDPR and Polish labour law data protection provisions; (3) no evidence of Polish DPA registration or compliance measures found. Risk is not High because GDPR already covers the core obligations.

Evidence: https://conscensia.com/tech-hubs/warsaw-poland/, https://uodo.gov.pl/

Financials

Three-year financials

Financial Resilience Score: 7/10

Conscensia is a small-to-mid-sized Danish-owned nearshore IT services firm with approximately 280 employees and nearly 20 years of continuous operation. The company demonstrates strong qualitative indicators of financial resilience: long-standing customer relationships (10-15 years with anchor clients like Spar Nord, Systematic, Getinge, Kamstrup, and Welltec), three consecutive Børsen Gazelle awards (2014, 2015, 2016) signaling a documented track record of profitable rapid growth, and strategic ownership by Systematic A/S which provides both a captive anchor customer and balance-sheet credibility. The company has demonstrated operational resilience through the Russia-Ukraine war by leveraging its dual delivery footprint in Lviv (Ukraine) and Warsaw (Poland, opened 2019). Geographic diversification within Europe gives clients continuity options. However, verified three-year financial figures (revenue, EBIT, equity) were not retrievable in this research session and would need to be pulled from datacvr.virk.dk or Proff.dk filings under CVR 26459400. Risks include significant Ukraine exposure (Lviv historically being the larger hub), customer concentration in Danish/Nordic mid- and large-caps, a single business model (time-and-materials/dedicated-team staffing with no product IP and margins capped by wage inflation), and small absolute scale limiting financial buffers versus larger competitors like EPAM, Ciklum, and Intellias.

Key strengths: Long-standing 10-15 year customer relationships with Nordic blue-chip clients, Strategic ownership by Systematic A/S providing anchor customer and credibility, Three consecutive Børsen Gazelle awards (2014-2016) indicating profitable growth, Geographic delivery diversification between Ukraine and Poland, Nearly 20 years of continuous operation since 2006

Risk factors: Ukraine war exposure with Lviv historically being the largest hub, Customer concentration in Danish/Nordic mid- and large-cap accounts, Single business model dependent on time-and-materials IT staffing with no product IP, Small absolute scale (~280 staff) limits financial buffers vs. larger competitors, Margins capped by wage inflation in Poland/Ukraine

Revenue by geography

Revenue by product/service

Workforce by country

Signed-in users can see whether their own company is exposed to this vendor's disruption, plus the full sub-vendor list and country breakdowns, every in-scope compliance framework plus gaps and next steps, and alerts when any of it changes.

View the full interactive report