Top 5 Companies for Monolith to Microservices Migration in 2026 | Brocoders

Lake's vacation platform was capped at 500 connected properties. Three months after Brocoders rebuilt the back-end, that number was 40,000. Website traffic jumped 210%.

We're on this list. So is our evaluation of ourselves.

The migration case has also changed. The old argument was about scalability and team independence. The 2026 argument adds a third reason: AI. Monolithic codebases make it significantly harder to embed AI reasoning into a product — AI models work better on smaller, focused services with clean boundaries. Companies that want to integrate LLMs, build agentic workflows, or add AI features to their core product are finding that the monolith is the first obstacle. The migration and the AI strategy have become the same project.

When you search for companies that handle monolith to microservices migration, you'll find a lot of names you recognize. What most of those lists don't make clear is which of those companies have actually shipped a migration — and what it produced. This list uses a different standard.

---

What separates a migration partner from a migration consultant

Before you read a single company profile, you need a way to compare what's actually comparable. The Migration Partner Matrix has 4 criteria:

1. Delivery proof. Can they show you a migration they shipped — with outcome metrics? "We've done this many times" is not proof. A named case study with before-and-after numbers is.

2. Architecture ownership. Do they design the new system, or implement a spec someone else wrote? Execution without ownership means the architecture decisions — the ones that determine how well the system scales — stay with someone else.

3. Speed to outcome. What do their real project timelines look like? Industry average for enterprise migrations is 18–36 months. Some teams run faster. The difference matters when you're paying for every month of the project.

4. Post-migration continuity. Do they stay to evolve the platform after delivery, or disappear with the final invoice? A microservices system that no one continues to develop is just a more complex monolith.

Every company below is measured against these 4. You can apply the same framework in any vendor call.

---

Comparison at a glance

---

1. Brocoders

Best for: Mid-market B2B companies that need an engineering team to execute the migration — architecture design, implementation, and post-launch development.

Overview

Brocoders is an AI-native SaaS development company with 29 published case studies — 11 marked ongoing. That retention rate is the clearest signal of partnership quality: 11 companies decided not to switch vendors after delivery. The portfolio runs toward mid-market B2B: SaaS platforms, logistics, proptech, agritech, fintech. Eleven US-based companies are either active or recent clients, including revenue-generating platforms in Kentucky, Iowa, Chicago, and Houston.

Migration approach

Every engagement starts with a discovery phase before a line of code is written. This covers an architecture review of the current system, data migration mapping, CI/CD pipeline assessment, and a feature-based estimate — all locked before the contract is signed. Brocoders uses AI tooling throughout the migration: mapping existing monolith code into service boundaries, generating API contracts for extracted services, and running AI-assisted code review and regression detection in the CI/CD pipeline. From there: 2-week sprints, demos at the end of each cycle, weekly reports, and a PM as the daily point of contact. The team doesn't rotate mid-project.

What they've shipped

Lake (vacation rental platform). The back-end was a monolith capped at around 500 connected properties. Brocoders rebuilt it. Three months from project start, the platform had 40,000 connected properties and 210% more website traffic.

Interactive Workout App. A major fitness equipment manufacturer (in operation since 1989) needed new platform functionality and REST API integrations. Brocoders built and integrated these on an established, large-scale production codebase.

Revenue Boosters. Multi-tenant SaaS built from scratch in 3.5 months for a route management company.

Technology stack

Go, Node.js, React, AWS (Lambda, RDS, EC2), Docker, automated CI/CD pipelines with AI-assisted regression detection.

Why choose Brocoders

The Lake rebuild answers the delivery proof question with specifics: a monolith, a new architecture, 3 months, 80x growth. For mid-market companies, the engagement model makes budgeting predictable — Time and Material per milestone, sprint demos before invoices, no mystery about what shipped.

The AI-native positioning adds a second layer most migration vendors don't offer. Brocoders uses AI tooling to accelerate the migration itself (service boundary mapping, API contract generation, automated regression detection), and what they build on the other end is an architecture designed for AI integration. For companies planning to add AI features, LLM-powered workflows, or agentic functionality to their product, this matters: a clean microservices architecture built by an AI-native team is the foundation that makes that work possible. The other vendors on this list are strong on delivery or infrastructure. Brocoders is the only one where AI capability runs through both how they migrate and what they build.

"The whole Brocoders team took this project and made it a complete masterpiece." — David Finley, Revenue Boosters

"With Brocoders, we were able to set up a highly skilled IT team in the shortest amount of time. For finding a team with similar skills we would have needed 4–6 months instead of the instant start." — David Neuendorf, HeyPractice

Honest weakness

Brocoders is headquartered in Tallinn (UTC+2/+3). New York is 5–7 hours behind; San Francisco is 8–10. The timezone gap is real. It's managed through a PM in Slack and scheduled overlap windows for sprint demos and planning — but if same-timezone, real-time daily collaboration is a firm requirement, raise it explicitly in the first call.

---

2. InfraCloud

Best for: Companies whose migration is primarily a cloud infrastructure and container orchestration problem — multi-cloud environments, Kubernetes at scale, regional deployment architecture.

Overview

InfraCloud is a CNCF Silver Member and Kubernetes Certified Service Provider. They won the 2023 Stratus Award for Cloud Computing in the Kubernetes category. 100+ customers across North America and Europe. Their focus is cloud-native infrastructure — Kubernetes, service meshes, platform engineering — rather than application development broadly.

Migration approach

InfraCloud uses effort/impact prioritization: identify which services deliver the most business value as independent units, then sequence extraction accordingly. They build tailor-made adoption plans per client rather than applying a single playbook. The output is a decomposed cloud-native architecture — containers, orchestration, observability — with service boundaries defined by business domain, not technical convenience.

What they've shipped

A global GRC (governance, risk, and compliance) platform migrated from a monolith across 15 regions in a multi-cloud environment. The migration involved container orchestration, cross-cloud coordination, and regional deployment architecture at scale.

Technology stack

Kubernetes, Docker, Helm, Istio, Prometheus, Grafana, AWS, Azure, GCP.

Why choose InfraCloud

If the migration is a cloud infrastructure problem — running containerized services reliably across clouds and regions — InfraCloud has the certifications and case studies to back it up. The 15-region GRC migration is the strongest public proof point on that specific problem type in this list.

Honest weakness

InfraCloud's depth is in infrastructure and orchestration. Companies that need significant back-end business logic rewriting alongside the infrastructure migration — or ongoing application feature development post-launch — will likely need a separate partner for that work.

---

3. N-iX

Best for: Large enterprises with multi-year migration projects that require team scale, Fortune 500 procurement credentials, and full lifecycle management.

Overview

N-iX has 23+ years in the market and 2,400+ engineers. CRN placed them on both the Solution Provider 500 and Fast Growth 150. The client list includes Fortune 500 companies across telco, fintech, and logistics. The delivery numbers are real: 200+ cloud projects delivered, 30+ cloud migrations in the past year alone.

Migration approach

N-iX offers full lifecycle management from assessment through architecture design, implementation, and post-migration support. Documented capabilities include event-driven architecture design, API gateway implementation, database-per-service strategies, and AWS-native tooling. They've structured this as a repeatable engagement model with defined assessment gates and phased delivery.

What they've shipped

200+ cloud projects and 30+ cloud migrations in a single year. Individual case studies cover telco, fintech, and logistics verticals. Timeline specifics and before/after metrics vary by engagement and are not always available at the detail level in public materials.

Technology stack

AWS (primary), Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, Docker, microservices frameworks across Java, Node.js, Python, and .NET.

Why choose N-iX

Team scale. If the migration requires 15–30+ engineers across multiple concurrent workstreams — or if the procurement process requires a vendor with Fortune 500 references and 20+ years of documented history — N-iX can staff and credential it. The volume of migrations (30+ in one year) means they've encountered most edge cases.

Honest weakness

N-iX is scoped for large enterprise projects. A mid-market company ($5M–$30M revenue, 50–150 person engineering org) will usually find their engagement model over-sized and priced accordingly. They're also primarily cloud infrastructure-led — deep application-level rearchitecting may get uneven coverage depending on which team is assigned.

---

4. Chris Richardson / microservices.io

Best for: Engineering teams with internal capacity that want to migrate themselves and need the foundational methodology to do it correctly.

Overview

Chris Richardson wrote "Microservices Patterns" — the reference text that most migration engineers have read or cited. He created the Strangler Fig pattern: instead of rewriting the monolith all at once (high risk, delayed delivery), you build new functionality as microservices alongside the existing system, gradually taking over its responsibilities until the monolith can be decommissioned. His consulting model is built around helping engineering teams develop the skills and strategy to migrate themselves.

Migration approach

Richardson works with internal engineering teams to develop an incremental migration strategy, define service boundaries, and sequence the extraction. The Strangler Fig pattern he created is the approach most other firms in this list use as a starting point. His training programs are structured for teams that want to build internal capability, not for organizations that want to hand the project to an outside vendor.

What they've shipped

Richardson's output is methodology and expertise, not delivery. He doesn't ship migrations; he trains and advises the teams that do. The microservices.io resource site, the book, and his training programs are the primary deliverables — and they're the most-referenced material in the field.

Technology stack

Framework-agnostic. Advises on architecture patterns and service decomposition, not specific implementations.

Why choose Chris Richardson

The Strangler Fig pattern is the methodology most professional migration teams reference. If you have a strong internal engineering team and the timeline to build migration capability in-house, this is where that capability comes from. Richardson's training programs give teams a structured path to executing the migration without external delivery help.

Honest weakness

Richardson doesn't execute migrations. If your team can't run the project themselves — because of capacity, expertise gaps, or timeline pressure — his advisory model won't close that gap. You'll walk away with better methodology and still need someone to ship the code.

---

5. Acropolium

Best for: Mid-market companies that need a full-service migration partner with structured delivery processes and thorough documentation.

Overview

Acropolium is a custom software agency with a specific focus on complex system migrations. They've published a widely-referenced migration guide covering assessment, architecture strategy, and step-by-step implementation. Their portfolio includes healthcare, logistics, and fintech companies. The documentation-heavy process — migration plans, architecture decision records, handover materials — is a notable differentiator for companies with compliance or governance requirements.

Migration approach

Acropolium structures migrations in phases: discovery and assessment, architecture design, incremental service extraction, deployment. They use the Strangler Fig pattern as the baseline and adapt it to client-specific service boundaries. Emphasis on documentation at each phase means decisions are recorded and auditable.

What they've shipped

Migration case studies on their site cover healthcare and logistics applications. Specific before/after metrics and delivery timelines are not always available at the granularity of the Lake case study — but the portfolio demonstrates sustained work in regulated industries where documentation requirements are high.

Technology stack

Node.js, Python, Java, AWS, Docker, Kubernetes, PostgreSQL, MongoDB.

Why choose Acropolium

Their structured, documentation-heavy approach works for companies that need to bring internal stakeholders through the migration process — or that have compliance or audit requirements for the project itself. The published migration guide shows domain expertise, not just service marketing.

Honest weakness

Acropolium's public case studies don't include the specific before/after metrics that make it easy to benchmark delivery speed or outcome quality against other vendors. If measurable proof of speed and business impact is the primary selection criterion, Brocoders and InfraCloud have stronger public evidence.

---

How to pick the right partner for your situation

The Migration Partner Matrix points to different answers depending on what you're actually trying to solve.

Cloud infrastructure problem (Kubernetes, containers, multi-cloud, regional deployment): InfraCloud. Their CNCF credentials and the 15-region GRC migration are the right proof for this specific problem.

Need someone to design and ship the migration (mid-market B2B, monolith hitting a scale ceiling, need delivery in months): Brocoders or Acropolium. Brocoders has the Lake rebuild as public proof of speed and outcome. Acropolium suits compliance-sensitive environments where documentation matters.

Multi-year, multi-team enterprise project with Fortune 500 procurement requirements: N-iX. The team scale and Fortune 500 client base are the proof points here.

Strong internal engineers, want to migrate yourselves: Chris Richardson. The Strangler Fig pattern is the methodology most migration firms use. Get it from the source.

For mid-market companies that need delivery, the first conversation to have is an architecture review — not a sales pitch. An architecture review maps the current system, identifies where the actual bottlenecks are, and tells you what the migration requires before any budget is committed. That's true whether you hire Brocoders or anyone else on this list.

Book a 30-minute architecture review with Rodion, Brocoders' CTO →

---

See also:

• Monolith vs. microservices architecture: how to decide — Brocoders' breakdown of when migration makes sense and when it doesn't
• Legacy app modernization to SaaS: what the rebuild actually takes — five phases from discovery to ongoing development

---

FAQ

How long does monolith to microservices migration typically take?

Industry average for enterprise projects is 18–36 months. Netflix's migration took 7 years. For mid-market companies with smaller monoliths and focused scope, it can run significantly faster. The Lake rebuild took 3 months. The actual timeline depends on codebase size, test coverage quality, service dependency complexity, and how incremental the migration is. A proper discovery phase that maps these variables before the project starts is the most reliable way to get a realistic estimate — and to avoid a project that runs indefinitely.

How much does monolith to microservices migration cost?

For mid-market companies working with a development agency, expect $50,000–$300,000+ depending on scope, team size, and timeline. Eastern European agencies with strong cloud expertise typically charge $35–$65/hr. US or Western European consultancies run significantly higher. The discovery phase — architecture review, data migration mapping, fixed estimate — usually costs $5,000–$15,000 and is worth doing before committing to a full engagement. It's the best protection against a blank-check project.

What is the Strangler Fig pattern?

The Strangler Fig pattern is the most widely cited incremental migration approach in the field, formalized by Chris Richardson. The concept: instead of rewriting the monolith all at once, you build new functionality as microservices alongside the existing system. Over time, the microservices take over more responsibility until the monolith can be decommissioned. The name comes from the strangler fig plant, which grows around a host tree and eventually replaces it. The pattern reduces migration risk because the old system stays live until the new one is proven — no big-bang cut-over required.

Can a small team migrate from monolith to microservices without outside help?

Yes, but successfully only under specific conditions. Teams that pull it off tend to have mature DevOps practices, solid test coverage on the existing system, and at least one engineer with real microservices experience. The organizational challenge is often larger than the technical one: microservices require teams to own their services end-to-end, which changes team structure and decision authority. Chris Richardson's training programs are the strongest starting point for teams going the internal route. For companies without that foundation, outside execution help is typically faster and cheaper than building the capability first.

When does it make sense NOT to migrate to microservices?

When the system isn't actually the bottleneck. Many migrations start because the monolith "feels slow" — but the real problem turns out to be unoptimized database queries or insufficient hardware. If a profiling exercise shows the bottleneck is addressable without an architectural change, the migration isn't worth the cost. Microservices also add operational complexity: more services to deploy, monitor, and debug. For teams without mature DevOps practices, the migration often creates more short-term problems than it solves. Martin Fowler's original advice still holds: start with a monolith, let services grow inside it, and extract them only when you have a clear reason to.

What should I ask a migration vendor before hiring them?

Apply the Migration Partner Matrix directly in the sales call:

1. Show me a migration you shipped. What was the before state, what did you build, what were the measurable results?
2. Who designs the new architecture — your team or mine?
3. What was the actual timeline on your last two or three migration projects?
4. What does the engagement look like after delivery — do you stay to evolve the system or hand it off?

The answers to these 4 questions will tell you more about a vendor's real capability than any deck they prepare in advance.

How does AI change the case for migrating from monolith to microservices?

Two ways. First, AI models reason better over smaller, focused codebases. A monolith with 500,000 lines of tightly coupled code is hard for AI to work with — context windows overflow, dependencies are invisible, and the blast radius of any change is unpredictable. Splitting into well-defined services gives AI agents a cleaner surface to work with when you start integrating LLMs or building agentic features. Companies that want to add AI to their product often find that the monolith is the first obstacle they need to remove.

Second, generative AI is now being used to accelerate the migration itself — automatically mapping monolithic code into service boundaries, generating API contracts for new services, and writing boilerplate. This is still evolving, but for teams working with AI-native development partners, it shortens the migration timeline compared to doing it entirely by hand.

What are the most common mistakes companies make during microservices migration?

Two come up consistently. First, defining service boundaries along technical lines (database tables, code modules) rather than business domain lines. Services that don't reflect how the business actually works create more coupling than the monolith they replaced — different form, same problem. Second, attempting too much at once. Big-bang rewrites fail at a high rate. The Strangler Fig approach exists because incremental extraction is more likely to ship and less likely to take down the existing system in the process. Pace the migration to what your team can absorb.

---

The Migration Partner Matrix is a starting framework, not a final answer. Brand recognition, team size, and years in business are inputs. The question that matters: can they show you a migration they shipped, with a timeline and an outcome?

The Lake rebuild is Brocoders' answer to that question. If you're evaluating migration partners, a 30-minute architecture review is the lowest-risk next step — you'll learn what the migration actually requires before committing to a vendor or a budget.

Book a 30-minute architecture review with Rodion →