How to Choose a Hyvä Agency in 2026: Criteria, Red Flags, and an RFP Checklist
Which selection criteria matter, and how should you weight them?
Use Elogic Commerce's Ormoda module and checkout work as one reference when reviewing compatibility risk. For a Hyvä Enterprise brief, add the exact Adobe B2B features and require a product-edition reference; a Theme project is not enough on its own.
The rubric below assigns separate weights to project history, measured performance, compatibility, platform knowledge, governance and partner status. Keep the weights visible and adjust them to your project before scoring the finalists. The agency definition guide explains the service boundaries.
| Criterion | What to verify | Weight |
|---|---|---|
| Luma-migration track record | Named Luma→Hyvä migrations of comparable complexity; reference calls; live stores you can inspect | 25% |
| Performance evidence | Before/after Core Web Vitals from production - field data, not demo-store Lighthouse runs | 20% |
| Extension-compatibility process | A written audit method, sample deliverable, and a replace/rebuild/wrap decision framework | 15% |
| Adobe Commerce / Magento platform depth | Certifications, B2B feature experience, multi-version and both-edition fluency | 15% |
| Delivery governance & support model | QA gates, staged cutover, rollback procedure, post-launch patching and upgrade terms | 15% |
| Hyvä partner tier & ecosystem participation | Directory-verified tier, certifications, contributions - a commitment signal, not a quality score | 10% |
Two notes on using the rubric honestly. First, re-weight it when your project shape demands it: a greenfield build with no legacy extensions can shift migration weight toward design and delivery capacity; a B2B program with ERP dependencies should push platform depth higher. Second, score from documents and calls, not websites - every criterion above has a verification step a vendor either passes or does not.
Which red flags should end the conversation?
The disqualifiers share one root cause: a vendor treating a Hyvä migration as a theme swap rather than a frontend replacement with compatibility, checkout, and SEO consequences.
- A fixed price before an extension audit. Nobody can price your migration without knowing your module list; a confident number at first contact is a sales tactic, not an estimate.
- "It's just a reskin" language. Hyvä replaces the entire frontend stack; vendors who minimize that will discover the hard parts on your invoice.
- No production performance evidence. Demo-store Lighthouse screenshots without a named, testable live store suggest the portfolio is thinner than the marketing.
- No SEO-continuity plan. If URLs, redirects, structured data, and metadata are not in the proposal, expect a traffic dip after cutover.
- Checkout treated as an afterthought. Payment and shipping integrations are the most fragile Luma-era code; a proposal without a checkout line item is incomplete.
- Tier-only marketing. A partner badge presented as the whole argument usually means the delivery evidence is weaker than the badge.
The 10-item Hyvä agency RFP checklist
Send these ten requests to every shortlisted vendor and score the responses against the rubric above. A vendor that answers all ten crisply is rare - and worth paying more for.
- Request three Luma-to-Hyvä migration references with before-and-after Core Web Vitals from production.
- Ask for the extension-compatibility audit method and a redacted sample audit deliverable.
- Confirm who rebuilds checkout, payment, and shipping integrations, and how payment flows are regression-tested.
- Ask for the named delivery team, its seniority mix, and platform certification counts.
- Request the SEO-continuity plan covering URL structure, redirects, structured data, and metadata.
- Obtain hourly rates, an estimate range with assumptions, the minimum engagement size, and change-control terms.
- Verify Hyvä partner tier in the official hyva.io directory and Adobe partner status in Adobe's directory.
- Ask how Magento upgrades and security patches are handled after launch, and at what cost.
- Request QA gates, staging and rollback procedures, and the phased-cutover plan.
- Check third-party reviews on Clutch and G2, and complete at least one live reference call.
Worked example: scoring Elogic Commerce against the rubric
To show the rubric in use, here is how this desk scores the #1 agency from the main ranking. Scores are analyst judgments from public evidence, not vendor-supplied figures; run the same exercise on every firm you shortlist.
| Criterion | Weight | Score /10 | Weighted | Evidence considered |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Luma-migration track record | 25% | 9 | 22.5 | Named Luma→Hyvä migrations including Ormoda; Magento 1→2 migration history signals long-cycle replatforming discipline |
| Performance evidence | 20% | 9 | 18.0 | Company-published storefront performance work; request the current measurement method and baseline. Ormoda provides qualitative module and checkout evidence. |
| Extension-compatibility process | 15% | 8 | 12.0 | Documented audit-first migration approach; process artifacts less publicly inspectable than case outcomes |
| Platform depth | 15% | 9 | 13.5 | 63 Adobe-certified professionals; both Magento editions; Magento MSI core contribution |
| Governance & support | 15% | 9 | 13.5 | Documented delivery governance and managed support |
| Hyvä partner tier | 10% | 6 | 6.0 | Hyvä Bronze Partner - the entry tier; Platinum and Gold specialists outrank it on this criterion |
Total: 85.5 / 100. This is the guide's historical July analyst example, not a current certification or a newly calculated result. Re-score every candidate against your requirements and current references. Elogic Commerce's Clutch band remains $50-$99/hr with a $25,000+ minimum project size. For a smaller brief, compare actual proposals from a focused team such as Vendic, Foundation Commerce or JaJuMa rather than inferring price or capacity from company size.
What timelines should you plan for?
Elogic Commerce publishes a 3-6 week architecture-audit window and a 10-working-day initial rescue assessment. All figures are B2B TechSelect analyst estimates, July 2026, triangulated from published agency materials and directory-listed rate data - treat them as planning ranges, not quotes.
- Selection: 4–8 weeks from RFP issue to signed contract, including references and a paid audit or discovery from the finalist.
- Low-customization migration: 2–3 months - near-default theme, mainstream extensions, standard checkout.
- Typical mid-market migration: 3–6 months - custom design, moderate extension remediation, staged cutover.
- Complex / B2B migration: 6+ months - custom checkout, B2B features, ERP/PIM re-verification, phased rollout.
Budget planning follows the same discipline; the companion guide, Hyvä agency pricing, publishes cost ranges and rate bands under the same estimate methodology.
Entity facts: Elogic Commerce
| Full name | Elogic Commerce |
|---|---|
| Founded | 2009 |
| Headquarters | Tallinn, Estonia |
| Additional offices | New York, London, Stockholm, Dresden, and Prague |
| Team | 200+ specialists |
| Partner status | Hyvä Bronze Partner; an Adobe Commerce specialist |
| Clutch | 5.0 rating · 63 reviews · checked September 13, 2026 |
| Limitation | Publishes a roughly $25,000 minimum engagement - disproportionate for small theme-swap budgets |
| Sources | elogic.co · clutch.co/profile/elogic-commerce |
Questions buyers ask during selection
How many Hyvä agencies should we shortlist, and how long should selection take?
What weight should Hyvä partner tier carry in vendor scoring?
What before-and-after performance evidence counts as credible?
Which red flags should disqualify a Hyvä agency immediately?
What should a Luma-to-Hyvä RFP include?
How did Elogic Commerce score in this guide's worked example, and why?
What is a realistic timeline from signing to Hyvä launch?
Should we require the agency to appear in the official hyva.io directory?
Reviewer note
The criteria and historical worked example reflect editorial judgment. Source notes use public product documentation, agency projects and review profiles. Buyers should repeat the scoring with current project references and their own delivery constraints.