Clay vs Spaceberry Studio: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Clay (4.0/5) edges ahead of Spaceberry Studio (3.7/5) overall. Clay is the better choice for B2B SaaS, AI, fintech — big-tech client credibility. Spaceberry Studio is the stronger option for budget-conscious SaaS/AI teams, low-commitment subscription. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Clay vs Spaceberry Studio: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Clay | Spaceberry Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2015 | 2016 |
| HQ | San Francisco, CA, USA | Ukraine (also London, UK) |
| Team size | Boutique-to-mid (unconfirmed; not published by the company) | 12–50 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 3.7 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | An unusually large enterprise client roster (Coinbase, Meta, Google, Slack) for a studio that doesn't publish its own founding year or team size | One of the most accessible entry points in this list via a subscription model rather than a large upfront fixed-price contract |
| Pricing model | Fixed project | Monthly subscription (dedicated designer) |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $4.5K/month (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Primary tech stack | Figma, Framer, Webflow | Figma, Framer, Webflow |
| Industries served | SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products | SaaS / B2B software, Consumer products |
Clay vs Spaceberry Studio: overview
Clay
Clay — clay.global, not to be confused with the unrelated AI sales-data company at clay.com — keeps an unusually thin public profile for a studio whose client list includes Coinbase, Uber, SendGrid, MoneyLion, Meta, Google, Slack, Snapchat, Amazon, Toyota, and Samsung. Neither its founding year nor its team size is published or independently confirmed. What's clear from the portfolio: deep, repeated experience across B2B, SaaS, AI, and fintech product design, based out of San Francisco with significant NYC-based client work.
Spaceberry Studio
Spaceberry Studio began in 2016 as "MainCode Agency," rebranding to Spaceberry in 2020 — 2016 is used as the founding year here since it's the same continuous team and entity. Based in Ukraine with an additional London office, the studio runs 12–50 employees depending on source, selling subscription-style UI/UX design for SaaS, AI, and mobile apps rather than quoting fixed-price projects — one of two subscription models in this list alongside Eleken.
Services and capabilities: Clay vs Spaceberry Studio
| Capability | Clay | Spaceberry Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Product design | ✓ | ✓ |
| UX research | ✓ | ✗ |
| Branding | ✓ | ✗ |
| Web development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Mobile development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Design systems | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Clay vs Spaceberry Studio
| Framework / platform | Clay | Spaceberry Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Figma | ✓ | ✓ |
| Webflow | ✓ | ✓ |
| React | N/A | N/A |
| Framer | ✓ | ✓ |
| Adobe Creative Suite | ✓ | N/A |
| Design systems/Storybook | N/A | N/A |
| After Effects | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Clay vs Spaceberry Studio
| Criterion | Clay | Spaceberry Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $4.5K/month (per company website; independently unverifiable) |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Retainer | Subscription |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Accessible |
Target audience comparison: Clay vs Spaceberry Studio
| Dimension | Clay | Spaceberry Studio |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products | SaaS / B2B software, Consumer products |
| Best use cases | AI or fintech product design for a Series A-C startup, Consumer app design for a high-growth B2B SaaS brand | Ongoing SaaS product design on a monthly subscription, AI product UI/UX design for a lean startup team |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Subscription |
Clay vs Spaceberry Studio: pros and cons
| Clay | |
|---|---|
| + | Client list — Coinbase, Uber, Meta, Google, Slack, Snapchat, Amazon — is exceptional for a studio that doesn't publish its own size |
| + | Deep, repeated experience across B2B, SaaS, AI, and fintech product design |
| + | San Francisco base with substantial NYC-based client engagement history |
| + | Combines UX, branding, and web/product design under one team |
| - | Founding year isn't published or independently confirmed by any source outside the company |
| - | Team size isn't published either, making capacity planning harder for larger programs |
| - | Easily confused online with the unrelated AI company Clay (clay.com) — confirm you're looking at clay.global |
| Spaceberry Studio | |
|---|---|
| + | Subscription pricing (from ~$4.5K/month, per company website; independently unverifiable) is one of the lowest barriers to entry here |
| + | Focused specifically on SaaS, AI, and mobile apps rather than spreading thin across many verticals |
| + | London, UK location adds geographic diversification alongside its Ukraine base |
| + | Continuous operation since 2016, spanning its 2020 rebrand from MainCode Agency |
| - | Smallest reported team-size band (12–50) among the boutiques in this list, limiting capacity for large programs |
| - | Rebranded from MainCode Agency in 2020, so some pre-2020 case studies may appear under the earlier name |
| - | Subscription-only model may not suit clients preferring a single fixed-price contract with a defined end date |
Who should choose Clay?
A typical fit: AI or fintech product design for a Series A-C startup.
An unusually large enterprise client roster (Coinbase, Meta, Google, Slack) for a studio that doesn't publish its own founding year or team size. Minimum engagement starts at Not published. Works best with clients in SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech, Consumer products.
Who should choose Spaceberry Studio?
A typical fit: ongoing SaaS product design on a monthly subscription.
One of the most accessible entry points in this list via a subscription model rather than a large upfront fixed-price contract. Minimum engagement starts at $4.5K/month (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in SaaS / B2B software, Consumer products.
Decision matrix: Clay vs Spaceberry Studio
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Clay |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Clay (Not published) vs Spaceberry Studio ($4.5K/month (per company website; independently unverifiable)) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Clay |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: Clay vs Spaceberry Studio
| Use case | Clay fit | Spaceberry Studio fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| AI or fintech product design for a Series A-C startup | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Consumer app design for a high-growth B2B SaaS brand | Strong | Limited | Clay |
| Ongoing SaaS product design on a monthly subscription | Limited | Strong | Spaceberry Studio |
| AI product UI/UX design for a lean startup team | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price product build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Dedicated design team augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Clay vs Spaceberry Studio
Clay (4.0/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Product Design projects. An unusually large enterprise client roster (Coinbase, Meta, Google, Slack) for a studio that doesn't publish its own founding year or team size.
Spaceberry Studio (3.7/5) is worth a look if you need AI product UI/UX design for a lean startup team. If your situation matches that, Spaceberry Studio is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Clay vs Spaceberry Studio FAQ
Is Clay better than Spaceberry Studio?
Clay (4.0/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Clay's strongest advantage: client list — Coinbase, Uber, Meta, Google, Slack, Snapchat, Amazon — is exceptional for a studio that doesn't publish its own size. Spaceberry Studio's strongest advantage: subscription pricing (from ~$4.5K/month, per company website; independently unverifiable) is one of the lowest barriers to entry here.
How do Clay and Spaceberry Studio differ in pricing?
Clay uses fixed project pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published. Spaceberry Studio uses monthly subscription (dedicated designer) pricing with a minimum engagement of $4.5K/month (per company website; independently unverifiable). Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Clay or Spaceberry Studio?
Spaceberry Studio is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each studio before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Clay and Spaceberry Studio?
Clay's primary differentiator is: an unusually large enterprise client roster (Coinbase, Meta, Google, Slack) for a studio that doesn't publish its own founding year or team size. Spaceberry Studio's primary differentiator is: one of the most accessible entry points in this list via a subscription model rather than a large upfront fixed-price contract. They also differ in team size (Boutique-to-mid (unconfirmed; not published by the company) vs 12–50), minimum engagement (Not published vs $4.5K/month (per company website; independently unverifiable)), and primary industries served (SaaS / B2B software, Financial services / fintech vs SaaS / B2B software, Consumer products).
Verify all details directly with each studio before making a decision.