Very vs ScienceSoft: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Very (4.2/5) edges ahead of ScienceSoft (3.9/5) overall. Very is the better choice for funded US product teams, platform-heavy IoT. ScienceSoft is the stronger option for IoT dashboards and business-system integration. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Very vs ScienceSoft: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Very | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2011 | 1989 |
| HQ | Bozeman, Montana, United States (distributed) | McKinney, Texas, United States |
| Team size | 150–250 | 700–800 |
| Rating | 4.2 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering | Long software consulting history applied to IoT monitoring platforms |
| Pricing model | Time and materials | Time and materials, fixed price |
| Min. engagement | $250,000 | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded C, Elixir, Nerves | Azure IoT, AWS IoT, .NET |
| Industries served | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture | Healthcare, Industrial equipment, Retail, Logistics |
Very vs ScienceSoft: overview
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.
ScienceSoft
ScienceSoft has been in business since 1989, is headquartered in McKinney, Texas, and cites more than 750 experts across the US, the Gulf region and the EU. It has worked on IoT since 2011, mostly the software side: monitoring platforms, dashboards and integration with business systems. Clutch lists an IoT physiotherapy platform among its projects. Hardware and firmware are not where it is strongest.
Services and capabilities: Very vs ScienceSoft
| Capability | Very | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| 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: Very vs ScienceSoft
| Framework / platform | Very | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C | ✓ | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| RTOS | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | N/A |
| LoRaWAN | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure IoT | N/A | ✓ |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Very vs ScienceSoft
| Criterion | Very | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | $250,000 | Not published |
| Engagement models | Time and materials, Team extension | Fixed project, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Very vs ScienceSoft
| Dimension | Very | ScienceSoft |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics | Healthcare, Industrial equipment, Retail |
| Best use cases | A funded start-up needs a connected product and platform built by a US team., An energy company wants a fleet monitoring platform. | A manufacturer wants equipment monitoring linked to its ERP., A healthcare provider needs a remote patient monitoring portal. |
| Typical project type | Time and materials | Fixed project |
Very vs ScienceSoft: pros and cons
| 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 |
| ScienceSoft | |
|---|---|
| + | Decades of software delivery |
| + | Good at linking IoT data to ERP and other business systems |
| + | Fixed-price options |
| - | No hardware or firmware focus |
| - | Headcount figures vary between sources |
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.
Who should choose ScienceSoft?
A typical fit: a manufacturer wants equipment monitoring linked to its ERP.
Long software consulting history applied to IoT monitoring platforms. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Healthcare, Industrial equipment, Retail, Logistics.
Decision matrix: Very vs ScienceSoft
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | ScienceSoft |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Very ($250,000) vs ScienceSoft (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Very |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Very |
| You need the circuit board designed as well as the firmware | Very |
Use case fit: Very vs ScienceSoft
| Use case | Very fit | ScienceSoft fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A funded start-up needs a connected product and platform built by a US team. | Strong | Limited | Very |
| An energy company wants a fleet monitoring platform. | Strong | Limited | Very |
| A manufacturer wants equipment monitoring linked to its ERP. | Limited | Strong | ScienceSoft |
| A healthcare provider needs a remote patient monitoring portal. | Limited | Strong | ScienceSoft |
| You need custom electronics designed, not only firmware | Strong | Limited | Very |
| You want a fixed-price first phase before a longer engagement | Limited | Strong | ScienceSoft |
Verdict: Very vs ScienceSoft
Very (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IoT Development projects. US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering.
ScienceSoft (3.9/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a healthcare provider needs a remote patient monitoring portal. If your situation matches that, ScienceSoft is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Very vs ScienceSoft FAQ
Is Very better than ScienceSoft?
Very (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Very's strongest advantage: US-based engineers and product managers. ScienceSoft's strongest advantage: decades of software delivery.
How do Very and ScienceSoft differ in pricing?
Very uses time and materials pricing with a minimum engagement of $250,000. ScienceSoft uses time and materials, fixed price pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Very or ScienceSoft?
ScienceSoft 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 Very and ScienceSoft?
Very's primary differentiator is: US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. ScienceSoft's primary differentiator is: long software consulting history applied to IoT monitoring platforms. They also differ in team size (150–250 vs 700–800), minimum engagement ($250,000 vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial equipment, Energy vs Healthcare, Industrial equipment).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.