Softeq vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Softeq (4.6/5) edges ahead of Very (4.2/5) overall. Softeq is the better choice for US companies wanting a domestic full-stack IoT partner. 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.
Softeq vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Softeq | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1997 | 2011 |
| HQ | Houston, Texas, United States | Bozeman, Montana, United States (distributed) |
| Team size | 350–500 | 150–250 |
| Rating | 4.6 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Nearly three decades of US-led engineering, with custom hardware and firmware under the same roof as cloud and apps | US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, fixed price | Time and materials |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $250,000 |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded C/C++, Embedded Linux, BLE | Embedded C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Consumer electronics, Industrial equipment, Healthcare, Energy, Automotive | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture |
Softeq vs Very: overview
Softeq
Christopher A. Howard founded Softeq in Houston in 1997, and Compaq was its first client. Over time the company moved from web and mobile work toward IoT, embedded systems, machine learning and immersive technology. Headcount figures range from about 350 to over 500, depending on the source. US buyers get a domestic contract and project leadership, with hardware design and firmware in the same company.
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: Softeq vs Very
| Capability | Softeq | 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: Softeq vs Very
| Framework / platform | Softeq | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | ✓ | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | ✓ | N/A |
| LoRaWAN | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure IoT | ✓ | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Softeq vs Very
| Criterion | Softeq | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | $250,000 |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Time and materials | Time and materials, Team extension |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Minimum disclosed |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Softeq vs Very
| Dimension | Softeq | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer electronics, Industrial equipment, Healthcare | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics |
| Best use cases | A US consumer electronics brand needs a smart home device designed and connected to an app., An oil and gas company wants rugged sensors with a cloud monitoring dashboard. | 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 |
Softeq vs Very: pros and cons
| Softeq | |
|---|---|
| + | US headquarters and contracts suit buyers who need domestic accountability |
| + | Covers custom hardware as well as device firmware and cloud software |
| + | Long track record with large technology clients dating back to Compaq |
| - | US-based leadership pushes rates above Central European competitors |
| - | Headcount figures vary widely between directories, so confirm team size directly |
| 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 Softeq?
A typical fit: a US consumer electronics brand needs a smart home device designed and connected to an app.
Nearly three decades of US-led engineering, with custom hardware and firmware under the same roof as cloud and apps. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Consumer electronics, Industrial equipment, Healthcare, Energy, 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: Softeq vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Softeq |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Softeq (Not published) vs Very ($250,000) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Softeq |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Very |
| You need the circuit board designed as well as the firmware | Softeq |
Use case fit: Softeq vs Very
| Use case | Softeq fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A US consumer electronics brand needs a smart home device designed and connected to an app. | Strong | Limited | Softeq |
| An oil and gas company wants rugged sensors with a cloud monitoring dashboard. | Strong | Limited | Softeq |
| 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 | Softeq |
Verdict: Softeq vs Very
Softeq (4.6/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IoT Development projects. Nearly three decades of US-led engineering, with custom hardware and firmware under the same roof as cloud and apps.
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
Softeq vs Very FAQ
Is Softeq better than Very?
Softeq (4.6/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Softeq's strongest advantage: US headquarters and contracts suit buyers who need domestic accountability. Very's strongest advantage: US-based engineers and product managers.
How do Softeq and Very differ in pricing?
Softeq uses time and materials, fixed price 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: Softeq or Very?
Softeq 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 Softeq and Very?
Softeq's primary differentiator is: nearly three decades of US-led engineering, with custom hardware and firmware under the same roof as cloud and apps. Very's primary differentiator is: US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. They also differ in team size (350–500 vs 150–250), minimum engagement (Not published vs $250,000), and primary industries served (Consumer electronics, Industrial equipment vs Industrial equipment, Energy).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.