Comparison · Engagement model
Agency retainer or software you own? Recurring work: retainer. A finished system: build once.
Both routes deliver software. They differ in who owns the code at the end, who is allowed to change it, and what happens when the engagement stops.
How we compare
-
We sell the alternative
This is not a neutral review. That is why price date, assumptions and the maths sit openly next to it.
-
Both outcomes are shown
Including the scenarios where the vendor wins. A comparison that always ends in our favour would be advertising.
-
Only evidenced numbers
List prices with a source. Where a vendor does not publish, no invented total appears.
-
Your numbers decide
The calculator takes your users, your volume and your term instead of our assumption.
In short
A retainer buys ongoing availability, a one-time build buys a finished system. For work that genuinely recurs, the retainer is the better fit and often the cheaper one. For a system that gets built and then operated, you are paying indefinitely for readiness you no longer need.
Why there is no calculation here: There is no three-year calculation on this page. Agency fees are negotiated rather than published, and any example figure would be an assumption we picked ourselves. What can be compared is the structure of the two models, and that is below.
In detail
Where the models differ
| Point | Agency | FW Delta |
|---|---|---|
| Billing | a running amount, usually monthly | a one-time build plus operations |
| What the amount buys | availability and capacity | a finished, handed-over system |
| Code ownership | varies by contract, so check it | yours, with access from day one |
| Who may change it | in practice the agency | your team, any agency, any freelancer |
| Response time | contractually committed | by agreement, otherwise on demand |
| Knowledge of the system | accumulates at the agency | handed over with the documentation |
| When the engagement ends | depends on what the contract hands over | code, configuration and documentation stay |
The decision
What speaks for which route.
A one-time build fits when
- a bounded system is needed that then simply runs
- the code has to be yours for contractual or strategic reasons
- the ongoing work after the build is modest
- you want to keep the option of changing supplier
A retainer fits when
- · work genuinely recurs rather than appearing occasionally
- · campaigns, content or design are part of it, not just development
- · a committed response time matters more than ownership
- · nobody in-house could take a system over
If you want to switch
What happens next
-
30 minutes
Conversation
We walk through your starting point and say honestly whether a move pays off for you.
-
within five working days
Fixed-price proposal
With scope, assumptions and what is explicitly not included.
-
depending on scope
Build and handover
Code access from day one, manual at the end, no obligation to keep us.
Common questions
Why is there no cost calculation here?
Because we would have to set both sides ourselves. An agency fee is negotiated and appears in no price list. An example figure we choose inevitably produces the result we want. That is not a comparison.
Is an agency more expensive?
Not inherently. Where work genuinely recurs, a retainer is usually cheaper than billing by the hour. It gets expensive where it continues after the work is long finished.
Do you work on a retainer?
Only where it is needed, and then as maintenance with a defined scope rather than a mandatory tie. The normal case is that a project ends and the system runs without us.
Read on
Where to go next.
Next step
Talk about the actual case
Whether a retainer or a one-time build fits depends on how much work is left after the build.
Reply within 24 hours. No obligation, confidential.