Etteplan vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Etteplan (4.3/5) edges ahead of Very (4.2/5) overall. Etteplan is the better choice for industrial machinery makers, Nordic buyers. Very is the stronger option for funded US product teams, platform-heavy IoT. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Etteplan vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Etteplan | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1983 | 2011 |
| HQ | Espoo, Finland | Bozeman, Montana, United States (distributed) |
| Team size | 3,500–4,000 | 150–250 |
| Rating | 4.3 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Mechanical, electrical and embedded engineering in one listed company | US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, fixed price, managed service | Time and materials |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $250,000 |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded C/C++, Embedded Linux, PCB design | Embedded C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Industrial equipment, Energy, Healthcare, Automotive | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture |
Etteplan vs Very: overview
Etteplan
Etteplan is a Finnish engineering services company with around 3,800 to 4,000 staff in Finland, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, Poland, Denmark and China. Its Software and Embedded Solutions unit develops embedded software, electronics and IoT systems for industrial manufacturers. In March 2026 the company finished change negotiations in that unit covering 336 people in Finland and cut up to 28 jobs. It also does mechanical engineering and technical documentation, which is useful when a product needs more than electronics.
Very
Very was founded in 2011 by Ben Wald and started out building software and websites before settling on IoT. Its staff work remotely across the US, with Bozeman, Montana listed as its base, and Built In counts 193 employees. The company covers hardware prototyping, firmware, IoT platforms and apps. Its Clutch profile lists a $250,000 minimum project size and $200 to $300 hourly rates.
Services and capabilities: Etteplan vs Very
| Capability | Etteplan | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Electronics & PCB design | ✓ | ✓ |
| Firmware & embedded software | ✓ | ✓ |
| Wireless connectivity | ✓ | ✗ |
| IoT cloud platforms | ✓ | ✓ |
| Mobile & web apps | ✗ | ✓ |
| Edge AI & data | ✗ | ✓ |
| Prototyping & manufacturing support | ✓ | ✗ |
| Dedicated team model | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Etteplan vs Very
| Framework / platform | Etteplan | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | N/A |
| LoRaWAN | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | ✓ |
| Azure IoT | ✓ | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Etteplan vs Very
| Criterion | Etteplan | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $250,000 |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Managed service, Time and materials | Time and materials, Team extension |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Etteplan vs Very
| Dimension | Etteplan | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial equipment, Energy, Healthcare | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics |
| Best use cases | A machinery maker wants connectivity added to a product line., An energy company needs control electronics redesigned. | A funded start-up needs a connected product and platform built by a US team., An energy company wants a fleet monitoring platform. |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Time and materials |
Etteplan vs Very: pros and cons
| Etteplan | |
|---|---|
| + | Can handle mechanical design and documentation as well as electronics |
| + | Public listing gives transparency on finances |
| + | Large Nordic industrial client base |
| - | Cut up to 28 jobs in its embedded unit in Finland in March 2026 |
| - | Heavier process and overhead than boutique IoT firms |
| Very | |
|---|---|
| + | US-based engineers and product managers |
| + | Strong on cloud platforms and data, not just devices |
| + | Experience taking products from prototype to launch |
| - | $250,000 minimum and $200 to $300 hourly rates rule out most small projects |
| - | Less electronics design depth than dedicated hardware houses |
Who should choose Etteplan?
A typical fit: a machinery maker wants connectivity added to a product line.
Mechanical, electrical and embedded engineering in one listed company. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial equipment, Energy, Healthcare, Automotive.
Who should choose Very?
A typical fit: a funded start-up needs a connected product and platform built by a US team.
US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. Minimum engagement starts at $250,000. Works best with clients in Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture.
Decision matrix: Etteplan vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Etteplan |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Etteplan (Not published) vs Very ($250,000) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Etteplan |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Very |
| You need the circuit board designed as well as the firmware | Etteplan |
Use case fit: Etteplan vs Very
| Use case | Etteplan fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A machinery maker wants connectivity added to a product line. | Strong | Limited | Etteplan |
| An energy company needs control electronics redesigned. | Strong | Limited | Etteplan |
| A funded start-up needs a connected product and platform built by a US team. | Limited | Strong | Very |
| An energy company wants a fleet monitoring platform. | Limited | Strong | Very |
| You need custom electronics designed, not only firmware | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| You want a fixed-price first phase before a longer engagement | Strong | Limited | Etteplan |
Verdict: Etteplan vs Very
Etteplan (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IoT Development projects. Mechanical, electrical and embedded engineering in one listed company.
Very (4.2/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: an energy company wants a fleet monitoring platform. If your situation matches that, Very is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Etteplan vs Very FAQ
Is Etteplan better than Very?
Etteplan (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Etteplan's strongest advantage: can handle mechanical design and documentation as well as electronics. Very's strongest advantage: US-based engineers and product managers.
How do Etteplan and Very differ in pricing?
Etteplan uses time and materials, fixed price, managed service pricing. Very uses time and materials pricing with a minimum engagement of $250,000. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Etteplan or Very?
Etteplan is the larger team and typically the better enterprise-scale choice. For very large programmes, verify team size and compliance coverage directly with each company before shortlisting.
What are the main differences between Etteplan and Very?
Etteplan's primary differentiator is: Mechanical, electrical and embedded engineering in one listed company. Very's primary differentiator is: US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. They also differ in team size (3,500–4,000 vs 150–250), minimum engagement (Not published vs $250,000), and primary industries served (Industrial equipment, Energy vs Industrial equipment, Energy).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.