The choice between onshore and offshore data annotation models is one of the key issues faced by teams developing AI-based products. Although this stage is often perceived as routine, the final performance of the ML model largely depends on the quality, accuracy, and timeliness of the markup.
From a practical point of view, markup can be performed both locally (within the customer’s country) and by engaging external contractors abroad. Each approach has its own strengths and weaknesses, and there is no universal solution.
On the business side, the task is to build a process that is economically justified, meets regulatory requirements, provides the necessary scalable annotation services, and does not slow down the Go-To-Market strategy. From the ML team’s point of view, the priority is quality control, feedback speed, depth of subject matter expertise of the markup experts, and the ability to flexibly integrate feedback into iterations.
We have prepared this material to systematize the arguments in favor of each of the models, help avoid typical mistakes when choosing, and offer a practical structure for making a decision. The text will be useful both for technical specialists who are responsible for building data pipelines, and for product managers and development directors who assess the risks, budgets, and strategic prospects for implementing ML solutions.
What Is Onshore vs Offshore Annotation?
Choosing between onshore and offshore data annotation is one of the first strategic steps when scaling projects of AI data annotation services. This decision directly affects the speed of the model’s time to market, the cost of processing, and compliance with regulatory requirements. To make an informed choice, it is important to understand the differences between these models, how they work in practice, and in what situations each shows the best results.
Definitions with Examples
In the context of creating high-fidelity datasets for machine learning tasks, the difference between onshore and offshore data annotation is determined not so much by geography as by the specifics of the operating model.
Onshore annotation implies that the team performing the annotation is physically and legally located in the same country as the customer. This facilitates compliance with local data protection laws, speeds up communication, and reduces cultural barriers. For example, a Frankfurt-based startup developing an NLP model for processing German banking documents can engage an onshore team in Germany, while ensuring full compliance with BaFin and GDPR requirements.
Offshore annotation means that the performers are located in another country — often with lower labor costs and a significant talent pool. This allows projects to be scaled faster and more cost-effectively, especially when processing large arrays of visual or text data. A typical example is an American technology company that transfers image annotation to a team in India or Eastern Europe to create training samples for an automatic product sorting system in e-commerce.
Both models are technically equivalent in basic tasks, but critically differ in manageability, legal risks, and flexibility in adapting to specific industry requirements. Understanding these nuances is important not only for ML managers, but also for product managers responsible for strategic alignment with business goals
Typical Use Cases for Each Model
The practical application of both models depends on the context of the task, the degree of data sensitivity, and organizational priorities.
The onshore model is most often used in projects where the following are important:
- Regulatory requirements. For example, in medtech or fintech, where the processing of personal data is regulated by HIPAA or PSD2. Onshore teams allow you to avoid legal complications associated with cross-border transfer of information.
- Low tolerance for errors. In tasks where even minor errors can lead to critical consequences — for example, in forensic examination or when analyzing legal documents — the ability to closely monitor and promptly correct errors is valued.
- Deep subject specialization. If annotation requires understanding the local context (for example, annotating colloquial slang, rare dialects, or specific industry terms), then local teams prove indispensable.
On the contrary, the offshore model shows high efficiency in situations where:
- The project is focused on scale. Mass annotation of images, video data, or texts, for example, for computer vision systems in the automotive industry, requires the involvement of a large number of annotators, which is more logically done through offshore centers.
- The budget is limited. Startups or R&D departments often choose the offshore model for rapid prototyping, when priority is given to speed and volumes, rather than legal risks.
- Iterative approach to model training. In tasks that require quick preparation of training data for A/B tests or quick release of MVP, offshore annotation helps to flexibly scale efforts without lengthy approvals.
In real cases, a hybrid approach is often used: some tasks are given to the onshore team (for example, setting up guidelines, QA control), and bulk markup is delegated to an external partner. This approach is especially effective in mature ML projects with a regular need for new datasets and quality control at the level of DevOps practices.
Pros and Cons of Onshore Annotation
Onshore annotation is often seen as the preferred option for projects that prioritize control, compliance, and communication. However, this approach comes with a number of trade-offs, especially when scaling or working with a limited budget. Below is a balanced analysis of the pros and cons of the onshore model, based on practical experience in implementing large projects in the financial, medical, and automotive sectors.
Pros
The benefits of onshore annotation are especially evident in projects where process transparency, reliable communication, and compliance are important.
- Improved communication. No language barriers or time zones allow for effective collaboration.
- Cultural compatibility. Understanding local business practices and expectations.
- Easy monitoring. Ability to be present in person and intervene quickly when needed.
- Data security. Compliance with local data protection standards and laws.
- Legal compliance. Ease of compliance with regulations such as GDPR data annotation.
Cons
Despite the obvious advantages, onshore annotation is not without its limitations. For teams working under tight deadlines and a limited budget, these factors can be decisive.
- High costs: labor and operating costs are higher compared to offshore models.
- Limited scalability: difficulty in quickly expanding the team when needed.
- Less choice of specialists: limited access to diverse skills and experience.
Pros and Cons of Offshore Annotation
Offshore data annotation remains a popular choice for companies looking to scale projects quickly and optimize costs. However, while the model is attractive, it does come with risks, especially in the context of quality control, data protection, and compliance. Below is an objective analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the approach.
Pros
- Cost reduction: savings on labor and infrastructure.
- Wide range of specialists: access to a global talent market.
- Rapid scalability: the ability to quickly expand a team to process large volumes of data.
Cons
- Time zone friction: potential delays in communication and coordination.
- Language barriers: risk of misunderstanding requirements and instructions.
- Privacy concerns: the need for additional measures to protect data.
- Quality variability: differences in standards and approaches to annotation.
Reliable Data Services Delivered By Experts
Run a free testRun a free test
Key Factors to Consider When Choosing
Choosing between onshore data annotation and offshore data annotation requires more than just budget calculations. Each decision must take into account the specifics of the data, project goals, regulatory constraints, and the internal resources of the team. Below are key factors that help ML leaders and operations managers make the informed decision:
- Type of data (sensitive, regulated, domain-specific). For sensitive data such as medical records or financial information, onshore models are preferable to ensure compliance with strict regulatory requirements.
- Required annotation quality and speed. If the project requires high accuracy and fast turnaround, it is important to evaluate the team’s capabilities to ensure quality and meet deadlines.
- Internal oversight capabilities. The availability of internal resources to oversee and manage the annotation process can influence the choice of model.
- Compliance (e.g. GDPR, HIPAA, data residency). Compliance with regulations such as GDPR or HIPAA requires special attention to the location and processes of data processing.
- Budget and timeline constraints. Budget and time constraints may favor offshore models for their cost savings and flexibility. Hybrid options and vendor flexibility. Hybrid models that combine onshore and offshore approaches can provide a balance between quality, cost, and compliance.
Example Scenarios / Use Cases
In one project, the Tinkogroup team helped a software company improve the accuracy of entity identification in texts and annotate images for multimodal models. More than 8,000 messages were labeled with a focus on names, organizations, and locations, as well as sentiment analysis. Additionally, over 10,000 images were labeled. Thanks to clear instructions, constant cross-checking, and close work with the customer’s ML team, 98% accuracy was achieved. This data formed the basis of a highly accurate model that improved content search and moderation.
In another case, the customer needed a training dataset for a road damage and sign recognition system. The Tinkogroup team annotated over 1,000 images, adding over 15,000 labels by category such as cracks, markings, and signs. With the participation of experts, 97% accuracy was ensured, false interpretations were excluded, and the final dataset significantly accelerated the training and testing of the model. Both projects confirmed that proper annotation is the key to accurate ML decisions.
Decision-Making Framework or Checklist
Choosing between onshore data annotation and offshore data annotation is not just a question of budget. It affects the entire lifecycle of AI model development: from the quality and speed of annotation to compliance with safety and regulatory requirements. To make an informed decision, many factors need to be considered simultaneously. Below is a practical framework to help ML and AI teams systematically approach the choice of collaboration model and ask the right questions when choosing a data annotation service provider.
Questions to Ask:
- What type of data will be annotated? (sensitive, public, industry-specific)
- What are the requirements for accuracy and speed of annotation?
- Are there internal resources for quality control?
- What regulations must be followed?
- What is the budget and timeline for the project?
- Is a hybrid model being considered?
The answers to these questions will help determine the most appropriate data annotation model.
Conclusion & Recommendations
The choice between onshore and offshore data annotation directly impacts data quality, project timelines, and compliance with security and regulatory requirements.
Onshore annotation is suitable for sensitive and regulated data, providing better control, faster communication, and legal transparency. However, its high cost and limited scale remain its main drawbacks.
Offshore annotation is beneficial when scaling and cost reduction are needed. With properly built quality processes, it effectively handles large volumes of data. The main risks are time zones, language barriers, and security issues.
Often, a hybrid approach is the best solution, where sensitive tasks are handled onshore and the rest are handled offshore. This allows you to balance quality, speed, and budget.
It is recommended to launch pilots with potential suppliers, evaluate quality, control, and communication, and strictly monitor compliance with GDPR and other standards.
Why Tinkogroup Is the Perfect Partner for Data Annotation
Tinkogroup offers professional data annotation services combining high quality, compliance and flexibility in approaches. Cooperation with Tinkogroup provides:
- Accuracy and reliability. Experienced specialists ensure high quality of annotation.
- Compliance. Compliance with GDPR, HIPAA and other standards.
- Flexibility. The ability to adapt to different types and volumes.
Contact us today to learn more about our data annotation services for machine learning.
FAQ
Onshore annotation involves working with teams located in the same country as the customer, which provides a better understanding of the context, faster communication, and increased data security. Offshore annotation is performed abroad, which often reduces costs and allows for scaling projects, but requires more careful quality control and risk management.
The choice depends on several factors: data sensitivity, requirements for speed and quality of markup, budget, and regulatory restrictions. When working with sensitive or strictly regulated data, it is better to give preference to onshore teams. For projects with a limited budget and large volumes of data, an offshore model or a hybrid approach is suitable.
The main risks of offshore AI & Ml services are delays due to time zones, language and cultural barriers, as well as issues of data security and markup quality. To minimize these risks, it is recommended to carefully select the supplier, launch pilots, implement multi-stage quality control and ensure transparent communication at all stages.
