Thursday, June 5, 2025

Google AI Overviews Rely Heavily on Established News Sources, Report Shows

Google’s AI-generated search summaries appear to be giving a clear advantage to big-name news outlets, making it difficult for smaller publishers to get noticed. A recent study, conducted by SERanking, has revealed that a handful of major media brands dominate nearly all the citations in these AI Overviews, leaving very little room for others.

The analysis, which examined more than 75,000 AI responses, found that only about one in five even included a news source. Among those that did, just a small group of publishers accounted for the vast majority of mentions. The BBC, The New York Times, and CNN made up almost a third of all references to media, with the BBC alone responsible for more than 11.37 percent.



Despite the study focusing on search queries in the United States, UK-based outlets like the BBC still came out on top. The findings show that only 12 news organisations received nearly 90 percent of all citations. In contrast, the other 18 included in the analysis were left to split the remaining 10 percent between them. The Financial Times, for instance, was cited 195 times less than the BBC for the same set of keywords.

Several other well-known names, such as MSNBC, Vice, and TechCrunch, also struggled to break through. Together, those brands appeared in less than one percent of all media mentions. Researchers say the issue lies in how Google’s AI system prioritises sources that are already well-established. It tends to rely on outlets with high authority and recognisable names, making it much harder for lesser-known sites to gain visibility—even if they cover the same stories.

What’s more, this pattern doesn’t always match traditional search results. Around 60 percent of the media links cited in AI Overviews didn’t appear in the top 10 organic search results for the same terms. That suggests Google’s AI doesn’t simply rely on page rankings but draws instead on a mix of perceived trustworthiness and content quality.

Inequality in citation was measured using a Gini coefficient, a common tool used to study economic inequality. The score came in at 0.54—signalling a significant imbalance in how attention is spread across news providers. A perfect score of zero would mean all sources were treated equally.

There are concerns too about how the AI handles content from paywalled sites. In many cases, long segments of text were copied from behind paywalls and included in AI Overviews. Of those responses that pulled from subscription-only material, nearly seven in ten contained copied phrases of five words or more. Some even went beyond ten words. Despite this, fewer than one in six of those examples gave proper credit, raising questions around fair use and licensing.

When AI Overviews do include news links, most of them are pushed to the bottom of the response. Fewer than two links are typically used, and over 90 percent are tucked into a links section rather than the main text. Media brands are also more likely to be linked than named outright. In fact, more than a quarter of media mentions appear without any clickable link at all, especially when the AI pulls information from aggregators instead of original reporting.

The type of search query also plays a part. People looking for news are more likely to see AI responses that include media citations, with news-related searches being more than twice as likely to contain media references compared with general ones. This opens the door slightly for outlets that specialise in breaking news or niche topics. Still, the broad trend heavily favours the larger players.

Although smaller publishers face clear challenges, the researchers point out a few ways they might improve their chances. Getting backlinks from sites already cited in AI Overviews could help. So could refining technical signals on their own websites—like properly using metadata to mark whether content is freely accessible. Publishers who focus on specific topics or underserved areas may also see better results over time, as Google’s AI seems to reward expertise in well-defined subject areas.

With Google’s AI Overviews now appearing in nearly one in five publisher-related searches, these patterns are likely to shape the future of online visibility. The old rules of SEO still apply, but increasingly, success depends on trust, authority, and depth of content—qualities that the AI appears to prioritise above all else.

Read next: Apple Rejects More Government Push Data Requests Amid Growing Demand
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Wednesday, June 4, 2025

WhatsApp to Let Users Build Custom AI Assistants Without Coding

WhatsApp is getting ready to introduce a new feature that will let people build their own AI chatbots directly inside the app, without needing to write any code, as first spotted by WBI. This move follows similar efforts from other tech companies, like OpenAI with its custom GPTs and Google with its Gemini Gems. The idea is to make it easier for everyday users to create assistants or characters they can talk to, all through a few guided steps within WhatsApp itself.


The tool is part of Meta’s wider AI Studio platform, which until now has mainly been used through the web or on apps like Messenger and Instagram. With this update, WhatsApp will gain similar capabilities, allowing people to build and personalise their own AI experiences without leaving the messaging app. A small number of beta testers using Android and iOS have already started to see a new section called “AI Studio,” where the feature is being tested quietly ahead of a wider rollout.

Instead of overwhelming users with technical terms, the chatbot creation process is designed to be simple and intuitive. It begins by asking the user to pick a role for their AI—whether it’s a helpful tutor, a travel planner, or even a virtual companion for motivation. After choosing the type of assistant they want, users then select a personality style, ranging from calm and thoughtful to lively and humorous or even formal and informative. Based on those choices, WhatsApp then provides intelligent suggestions to help fine-tune the assistant’s tone and behaviour during conversations.

While each AI chatbot will start out as private, WhatsApp will also give users the option to share them with others using a unique link. This approach is similar to what platforms like OpenAI and Google have already done, where users can browse and interact with bots created by others. Although features like the GPT Store haven’t become hugely popular, they still offer useful inspiration for building creative assistants, and Meta could be hoping to take a simpler and more user-friendly approach through WhatsApp.

At this stage, the feature is still in development and not available to most users, but signs of its arrival have already appeared in recent beta versions of the app. This adds to a busy period for WhatsApp, which has just launched an official app for iPad and started testing usernames, pointing to a broader push to expand what the platform can offer beyond traditional messaging.

Read next: Breaking Down Billion-Dollar Revenues: How Much Top Tech Companies Earn Per Employee
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Breaking Down Billion-Dollar Revenues: How Much Top Tech Companies Earn Per Employee

The massive profits posted by major tech firms often attract attention, but breaking those numbers down per employee reveals something even more striking. Among the industry’s largest players, Apple leads in workforce efficiency, by a wide margin.

Recent analysis from Statista shows that Apple generated $2.38 million per employee in 2024, significantly ahead of other tech giants. That figure places it well above Microsoft, Alphabet, Nvidia, Amazon, and Meta, reflecting a consistent edge in operational output per team member.

While Microsoft and Alphabet maintain strong positions in profitability and growth, Apple has built a reputation around maximizing returns through tight operational focus. Its revenue-per-employee figure exceeds Nvidia’s by roughly 15%, beats Alphabet’s by 25%, and more than doubles Microsoft’s efficiency rate. In the same measure, Microsoft came in at $1.08 million per employee, while Alphabet reached $1.91 million, highlighting the considerable gap Apple has carved out.

Meta and Nvidia were the only other tech companies to cross the $2 million threshold. Meta registered $2.19 million per worker, placing second, while Nvidia followed with $2.06 million. The comparison gets even more dramatic outside the traditional tech space. Tesla’s revenue per employee landed at $780,000. Amazon’s number was even lower, around $410,000 — barely one-sixth of Apple’s.

This gulf underscores more than just financial strength. It points to Apple’s ability to scale product lines, command pricing power, and optimize talent better than any peer in the sector. The company’s lean business model and emphasis on premium hardware have enabled it to extract greater revenue from fewer hands.

Despite a slight dip in year-over-year profits — Apple’s net income fell 3% to $93.7 billion — it still ranked just below Alphabet, which ended the year with $94.2 billion in net income. Yet, in terms of pure productivity per person, Apple stayed in a league of its own.

To illustrate that point, consider how quickly the company earns its profits. At its current pace, Apple generates about $178,200 per minute. That equates to $2,971 every second. Based on these figures, Apple earns as much in 17 seconds as the average U.S. worker does in a full year—around $50,000.

Efficiency at that scale isn’t simply about headcount or automation—it’s a result of precise business execution. In a tech landscape dominated by expansion and acquisitions, Apple’s model of focused innovation, high-margin products, and strategic hiring continues to deliver unmatched output per employee.

Company Revenue Per Employee (2024, in million USD)
Apple 2.38 million
Meta 2.19 million
NVIDIA 2.06 million
Alphabet 1.91 million
Broadcom 1.39 million
TSMC 1.15 million
Microsoft 1.08 million
Tencent 0.83 million
Tesla 0.78 million
Amazon 0.41 million

Read next:

• Inside ChatGPT: 11 Lesser-Known Facts That Shape the World’s Most Talked-About AI ChatBot

• Fake AI Video Ads on Facebook Are Spreading Malware to Millions
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Meta and Yandex Secretly Collected Android Users’ Private Browsing Data Without Permission

Two of the world’s biggest tech firms have been quietly collecting private browsing data from Android phone users, according to researchers.

Meta, which owns Facebook and Instagram, and Russian company Yandex were able to link users’ web activity to their personal app accounts. They did this without asking for permission or alerting users in any way.

The method bypassed both Android’s privacy settings and the protections offered by web browsers.

It relied on tracking scripts built into millions of websites.

These scripts communicated directly with the company’s apps installed on the same device. The apps, in turn, captured identifiers used in the browser and sent them back to company servers.

This allowed Meta and Yandex to match anonymous browsing activity with specific individuals.

The system worked even when people used Incognito or private browsing mode.

How it worked

The technique made use of something called localhost communication. It’s a feature of Android that allows apps to create quiet, hidden channels within a device.

When users visited a website that included Meta or Yandex trackers, those trackers tried to connect to a specific address on the phone itself. If the Facebook, Instagram, or Yandex app was installed, it responded to the request in the background.

It then collected a unique code that could identify the user and linked it to their app session.

That code was sent back to company servers, linking a person’s web browsing to their app profile.

Researchers found that the Meta system was built into the company’s software development kit, or SDK, which is used by millions of websites and apps. Yandex had created a similar setup through its own AppMetrica tracking system.

Scale and duration

The tracking appears to have gone on for years.

Yandex began using the method in 2017, while Meta only added it more recently, in 2024.

Researchers believe that millions of Android users have been affected.

They found that Meta’s tracking code was present on more than 5 million websites. Yandex’s was found on around 3 million.

Both companies were able to use this system to learn about what people were reading, what products they looked at, and which websites they visited — all linked to their names, emails, and app data.

No warning was shown to users. No permission was requested. And nothing was visible on the screen.

What’s been done

The findings were shared with Google and browser developers earlier this year.

Google has made changes to Android to reduce the risk. Some browsers have also released updates to stop websites from contacting these hidden app services.

But the fixes are not complete. Meta has already changed its system to use different ports and protocols in response. Yandex apps also delay the tracking for several days, which makes it harder to detect.

Security experts say this behaviour resembles tactics used by malware, where systems try to avoid being spotted by automated tests.

The researchers who uncovered the practice say it raises serious concerns about how app platforms handle privacy and user control.

Lack of transparency

None of the websites using the trackers appear to have known how the system worked.

Some developers have reported strange behaviour from the Meta Pixel. This included unexplained attempts to connect to local addresses when users visited their sites.

In most cases, developers were unaware that their websites could be used in this way to connect a visitor’s browsing history to their Facebook or Instagram account.

There was no public explanation from either company about how the system operated until after the research was published.

What users can do

At the moment, only Android devices are known to be affected. However as per researchers, "Android users are no longer affected by this type of abuse after [their] disclosure (for now)."

People who want to avoid this type of tracking are being advised to delete the apps involved.

There is currently no setting inside the apps or the websites that can fully stop the connection from being made.

Further action may depend on decisions by Google and regulators about how much access apps should be allowed on a user’s device — especially when that access is not visible or expected.

Image: DIW-Aigen

Read next:

• Study Shows Meta's Facebook Removes Harmful Content After Most Engagement Has Occurred

Inside ChatGPT: 11 Lesser-Known Facts That Shape the World’s Most Talked-About AI ChatBot
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Tuesday, June 3, 2025

How Many Free ChatGPT Searches Can You Make Each Day?

With AI tools becoming part of everyday work for so many professionals—from software developers to small business teams—knowing how much access you really get on the free version of ChatGPT is more important than ever. You might already be relying on it for writing code, generating content, or even answering customer questions. But if you've ever run into a message saying you've hit a usage limit, you’ve probably realized that there are boundaries you need to plan around.

In this guide, we’ll break down what the free usage limits actually are, why OpenAI puts those limits in place, and how you can make the most of what’s available without paying. We’ll also look at what your options are if your usage needs grow beyond what the free plan allows.

First Things First: Is There a Set Number of Free Searches?

OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, hasn’t published a strict number of free prompts per day. But based on user experience, most people get somewhere between 25 and 100 prompts per day (can be more or less) on the free plan (only if they use it occasionally). That number isn’t fixed—it can change depending on how busy the system is, whether OpenAI updates their policies, or if you’re using the tool during peak hours.

It’s also worth mentioning that the system sometimes uses a rolling window rather than a clean daily reset. In other words, you might not be able to use all 25 prompts in one burst and expect to have the same number available a few hours later. The limit could apply over a 24-hour period from the time you started using it, rather than resetting at midnight.

And on top of that, there’s rate limiting—a measure that slows down how quickly you can send messages. So even if you haven’t reached your daily quota, sending too many prompts in a short time might get you temporarily blocked from continuing.

How Many Images Can You Generate on the Free Plan?

If you're using ChatGPT's image generation feature (powered by DALL·E), there are limits you should be aware of. On the free tier, users can generally create about 5 to 10 images per day, though this number isn’t officially confirmed and can fluctuate based on system demand and usage policies. Because generating images is more resource-intensive than text, the daily limit is smaller, and frequent use may trigger short cooldown periods. If you're experimenting with visuals for design work, social media, or presentations, this cap is usually enough to get started. However, if you need more flexibility or faster access, upgrading to the ChatGPT Plus plan can offer higher usage limits and priority processing for image generation. Or you can shift to better alternatives.

Why Are There Limits in the First Place?

While it might seem frustrating to run into these restrictions, they exist for good reason. Running a tool like ChatGPT takes a significant amount of computing power and energy. Every message that goes through the system costs money in terms of server time, electricity, and infrastructure.

Limiting free use helps OpenAI control those costs while still offering broad access. It also helps ensure that the service stays fast and responsive for everyone. Imagine if tens of millions of users all had unlimited access at the same time—response times would slow to a crawl, and the quality of the tool would suffer.

Plus, limits serve as a soft nudge for users who need more robust access to consider switching to a paid plan. That’s not necessarily a bad thing—it’s just how freemium software works in practice.

How to Get More Out of the Free Version

If you're sticking with the free tier for now, there are several ways to get more value out of your daily prompts without feeling like you’re hitting a wall too quickly.

Start by being intentional about what you ask. Instead of sending three separate prompts to refine an answer, try to pack everything into a single, clear question. For example, rather than asking, “Write a headline,” then “Make it more exciting,” and then “Add a keyword,” ask for all of that in one go.

You can also save useful responses locally so you don’t have to ask the same things repeatedly. Some users even build lightweight systems to log common prompts and answers for easy reuse later.

Another useful approach is combining ChatGPT with other tools. If you’re comfortable with open-source models or browser-based automation tools, you can offload basic tasks to them and save ChatGPT for the higher-value queries that actually benefit from its reasoning ability.

And don’t forget that usage often drops during off-peak hours. If you’re finding yourself rate-limited during the workday, consider using the tool early in the morning or later in the evening when demand is lower.

What to Do When You Need More Than the Free Plan Offers

Eventually, you might find that the free version just doesn’t give you enough. Maybe you’re building a chatbot into your website, or you need AI help several times a day across different parts of your business.

If that’s the case, upgrading to ChatGPT Plus could be a good next step. For $20 a month, it offers faster responses, better availability during peak hours, and a higher daily limit—though even that plan can have usage restrictions at times depending on server demand.

For developers or businesses with specific integration needs, OpenAI’s API offers flexible, pay-as-you-go access. This is a better fit if you’re embedding AI features into software or building custom workflows.

There are also other AI models on the market worth exploring. Google’s Gemini, Anthropic’s Claude, and various open-source models like Mistral and LLaMA provide similar capabilities, sometimes with fewer restrictions—though you’ll need some technical skills to host or manage those systems yourself.

Some businesses adopt a hybrid setup, using ChatGPT for high-quality output and switching to cheaper or open-source alternatives for simple or repetitive tasks.

Things Developers and Small Teams Should Consider

If you’re using ChatGPT regularly, especially in a business or product setting, there are a few key points to keep in mind beyond just the number of daily searches.

First, always be clear about where your data is going. If you're working with sensitive customer information, make sure you're complying with relevant privacy laws and terms of service. OpenAI provides guidelines, but it's up to you to ensure compliance.

Second, monitor your usage patterns. Even if you’re on a paid plan, costs can add up quickly if you’re using the API or submitting large amounts of data.

It’s also smart to design your systems with fallback options. If the AI service goes down or reaches a limit, what happens to your users? Can your app display a helpful message or offer a non-AI alternative? Planning for those edge cases helps create a more reliable experience.

Lastly, keep an eye on performance. AI models evolve over time, and while ChatGPT is highly capable, it’s not perfect. Review outputs regularly to make sure they still meet your standards.

Final Thoughts

If you rely on ChatGPT to support your work, your business, or your development process, understanding the daily usage limits on the free version is more than just a technical detail—it’s part of staying productive and efficient.

While the free tier is generous for casual use, it’s not built for heavy or professional workloads. That doesn’t mean it’s not useful—it absolutely is—but it does mean you need to be strategic. With a bit of planning and smart usage, you can stay within your limits and still get excellent value.

And when the time comes to scale up, whether through a subscription, API access, or alternative tools, you’ll be ready to take that next step with confidence and clarity.

And don’t stress about hitting the limit—ChatGPT will always show a clear banner when you’ve reached it, so you can stay calm and keep GPT-ing without guessing.



Image: DIW-Aigen

Read next:

• AI Could Replace Jobs, But DeepMind Chief Believes New Roles Will Emerge

TikTok Shop Loses Its Spark as Sellers Face Paid Reality
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Executive Coaching Builds Confidence in Data-First Cultures

An increasing number of organizations are leveraging analytics, advanced algorithms, and the immense realm of big data to shape their strategies and achieve measurable outcomes.

Image: Freepik

Data is the foundation for making critical decisions in the modern business environment. However, it is not easy to transition from traditional management culture to data-driven management. Accustomed to relying on your valuable intuition cultivated with experience when managing your companies, even the most experienced and capable leaders can become paralyzed. There is a latent fear of misinterpreting complex data or relying too heavily on cold numbers.

In this sense, coaching fosters deep confidence and a sense of empowerment in a business environment that evolves at breakneck speed and where data is increasingly at the forefront. Data has become the foundation for making critical decisions in the modern business environment.

Closing the Gap Between Data and Decision-Making

Data literacy—an increasingly essential competence in modern leadership—often remains underdeveloped among executives who perhaps feel more comfortable with traditional decision-making methods based on experience and instinct.

A business coach acts as a solid bridge that connects these two shores. A coach focuses on cultivating robust analytical thinking and teaching leaders how to evaluate information critically and insightfully without succumbing to the feeling overwhelmed by complexity. It is important to emphasize that coaching does not seek to transform executives into data scientists.

Leaders must go beyond the mere observation of numbers to develop sound judgment and the capacity to prioritize results that align with the organization's overall goals. Coaching strengthens this crucial skill, transforming leaders into confident individuals who can use data and are genuinely competent in their strategic application.

Boosting Confidence in Uncertain and Fast-Paced Markets

As evidenced by an article in the prestigious Harvard Business Review , today's leaders face a unique set of challenges: the demands for real-time data that require immediate responses, the unpredictable nature of global markets, and the increasing pressure to act with speed and agility.

In this context of uncertainty and speed, a business coach plays a fundamental role in helping leaders navigate complexity with serenity and composure. An experienced business coach guides executives to trust their well-founded intuition, maintain a decisive stance, and balance the need to act quickly and the importance of deep reflection, even when faced with imperfect or incomplete information.

Ethical and Responsible Leadership in Data Usage

The rise of business cultures centred on data is not without significant ethical considerations. Issues such as information privacy, the potential bias inherent in algorithms, and the need for total transparency in data handling raise crucial questions about how organizations collect and use sensitive information.

Leaders must navigate these complex ethical waters and establish clear, solid ethical standards reflecting a genuine commitment to trust and accountability.

A business coach empowers leaders to reflect on these delicate issues deeply. Coaches facilitate meaningful discussions around complex ethical dilemmas, encouraging leaders to weigh the potential consequences of their decisions carefully. They help them integrate ethical considerations into their daily leadership practices, fostering in executives an organizational culture of responsibility, integrity, and trust at all levels.

Moreover, ethical leadership is not solely a moral imperative but also catalyzes long-term business achievement. Clear and transparent data practices establish strong trust among stakeholders, customers, and team members, setting the stage for enduring and sustainable growth.

To stay ahead of the competition, don't wait any longer. Face the reality that you need to empower your managers to interpret data efficiently. The faster we adopt a business coach, the more likely we are to be successful in the future.

Coaching as a Long-Term Asset in Digital Cultures

As our workplaces lean increasingly into running things with data at the forefront, business coaches are stepping up as an innovative, fundamental way we can invest in growing our leaders. Think about it: a 2023 report by the International Coaching Federation pointed out a pretty significant jump – a 54% increase – in the number of coaching professionals between 2019 and 2022. That tells you something!

One of the big reasons behind this growth is simple: coaching helps us think more clearly, make decisions with more confidence, and talk to each other openly and effectively. These aren't just nice-to-haves; they're crucial when navigating all the twists and turns of digital transformation. So, it's not just a fad that will disappear tomorrow.

Furthermore, coaching equips decision-makers with the confidence and clarity to balance intuition and analytics, ensuring that choices are well-informed and strategic. Ethical leadership, nurtured through coaching, adds another vital layer, helping organizations establish transparent practices and build trust within teams and with stakeholders. This alignment of ethics and decision-making sets the tone for a culture of integrity that drives long-term success.

Read next: Outsourcing Landscape Transforms: Small Teams, Budget Projects, and Global Growth Shape 2025 Software Development


by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Monday, June 2, 2025

Outsourcing Landscape Transforms: Small Teams, Budget Projects, and Global Growth Shape 2025 Software Development

In 2024, global spending on software development services reached about $436 billion. By 2033, that figure is expected to climb to nearly $1.5 trillion.

This shows a major shift in how more companies are choosing to work with outsource software partners.

To get a clear picture of this growing market, DesignRush studied over 2,000 software outsourcing companies and reviewed nearly 1,900 client experiences. The research offers a real-world view of how the outsourcing landscape looks in 2025.

Their findings shed light on common price points, team sizes, project types, and which regions are most active. The analysis includes data from over 80 countries.

Key Highlights

  • Average team size is 105 people, mostly small and mid-size teams.
  • 42% of firms offer projects under $10,000, great option for startups.
  • India is the most used destination, chosen by about 1 in 4 companies.
  • India also has the lowest average price at $24.81, compared to global average of $37.35.
  • Ukraine (3.47) and the U.S. (3.42) have the highest average satisfaction scores (out of 5).
  • Most demand comes from IT, software, and finance sectors.
  • U.S. firms handle more than twice the number of clients compared to global average.

Industry Average

Metric

Global Avg

Avg. Company Size

105 employees

Avg. Hourly Rate

$40.71

Avg. Project Budget

$21,380

Avg. Client Load

1.69

Avg. Review Score (/5)

3.10

Most outsourcing providers are small to mid-sized operations. While the average hourly rate hovered around $41, a large number of companies offered more flexible pricing, including support for smaller or early-stage projects.

These benchmarks help companies set expectations. Firms charging more or serving more clients might signal scale and experience, while others may specialize in niche or lower-cost work.

Where Are Most Firms Based?


These five countries have the most software outsourcing companies in the world.

The study reported 525 companies from the U.S., highest company count. That makes up more than a quarter of all the companies studied, followed by India.

The rest of the top five were all based in Europe.

Where Are Services Most Affordable?

For a tight budget, here are the five most affordable countries for software development outsourcing services.


India tops for the most budget-friendly option at $24.81. The Philippines and Poland also offer budget-friendly services, with rates far below the global average of $40.71/hour.

These lower rates offer options for startups or companies working with limited budgets.

Pricing Breakdown by Group

Percentile

Hourly Rate

25%

Under $20

50%

Under $35

75%

Under $50

Half of all companies charged less than $35 per hour. A quarter came in under $20, showing a wide range of budget options.

Common Budget Ranges

Project Budget

Share of Firms

Under $10,000

42%

Over $25,000

12%

Most providers were open to working with lower project budgets. This makes outsourcing more accessible for companies starting out or testing new products

Top Industries Using Outsourcing

The research analyzed over 1,900 verified client reviews. The analysis lists the countries with the best reviews.

Country

Avg. Review Score (out of 5)

Ukraine

3.47

United States

3.42

Poland

3.38

India

3.26

Firms in Ukraine and the U.S. received the strongest feedback. Clients mentioned better service and clearer communication.

Top Industries Using Outsourcing

Some industries outsource more than others. The top in include:

Industry

No. of Clients

IT Services

561

Computer Software

373

Financial Services

326

Marketing & Advertising

271

Healthcare & Hospitals

130

Retail

139

Real Estate

128

These are the industries that use outsourcing services the most. Companies in IT Services turned to software development outsourcing the most, based on DesignRush’s data.

The computer software and financial services fields also need extra support to build their software.

Client Load by Country

DesignRush’s data highlights how many clients companies typically work with.

Client Range

Company Count

1–3 clients

Most firms

10+ clients

Few firms

While most companies serve f

ewer than 3 clients at a time. U.S. firms tend to handle a higher volume.

Country

Total Clients

Avg. Clients/Company

United States

2,300

4.38

India

967

2.74

Ukraine

402

3.27

U.S.-based companies serve over 2,300 clients, more than double India’s 967, averaging 4.38 clients per company.

Spotlight on the U.S. Market

Over 857,000 people work in software outsourcing across the United States.

More than 500 firms serve this market. U.S. companies tend to charge more and take on more clients. But they also earn better satisfaction ratings, which may reflect the level of service.

Metric

U.S. Value

Total firms

525

Share of global firms

27%

Avg. team size

135 people

Avg. hourly rate

$49.83

Avg. review score

3.42

Clients per company

4.38

Where U.S. Firms Are Based

These are the top 5 states with the highest company count, according to DesignRush data.

Rank

State

No. of Companies

1

New York

463

2

California

421

3

Texas

251

4

Florida

110

5

Pennsylvania

85

Most software outsourcing companies in the U.S. are based in New York and California. These states are known for tech talent, big companies, and access to investors.

Comparing State Rates

Rank

State

Avg. Hourly Rate

1

Maryland

$15/hr

2

New Jersey

$26/hr

3

Massachusetts

$27/hr

4

Wyoming

$28/hr

5

Tennessee

$28/hr

These states offered the most affordable rates. They may appeal to smaller businesses seeking U.S.-based talent.

Maryland offers the most budget-friendly rates for software development services. New Jersey, Massachusetts, Wyoming and Tennessee are also great options for small businesses looking for U.S.-based teams at lower prices.

The software development outsourcing market is growing fast, and it’s full of options.

This report offers a snapshot of what’s out there in 2025. By understanding the average costs, satisfaction levels, and country strengths, businesses can move forward with confidence.

Read next: Study Warns That Friendly Chatbots May Enable Dangerous Behavior


by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World