Cambridge Consultants vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Cambridge Consultants (4.4/5) edges ahead of Very (4.2/5) overall. Cambridge Consultants is the better choice for novel sensing and wireless, first-of-a-kind devices. 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.
Cambridge Consultants vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Cambridge Consultants | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 1960 | 2011 |
| HQ | Cambridge, United Kingdom (part of Capgemini) | Bozeman, Montana, United States (distributed) |
| Team size | 800–900 | 150–250 |
| Rating | 4.4 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Scientists and engineers able to invent the technology a product needs, not just integrate existing modules | US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering |
| Pricing model | Time and materials, fixed price for defined phases | Time and materials |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $250,000 |
| Primary tech stack | RF design, Embedded C/C++, DSP | Embedded C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Healthcare and medical devices, Telecoms, Consumer electronics, Industrial equipment, Agriculture | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture |
Cambridge Consultants vs Very: overview
Cambridge Consultants
Cambridge Consultants has been developing products for clients since 1960 and employs more than 800 engineers, scientists and designers in Cambridge, Boston, Tokyo and Singapore. It came into Capgemini when Capgemini bought its parent Altran in 2020, and joined Capgemini Invent in 2021. Work spans medical devices, wireless systems, sensing and other early-stage technology. It also licenses intellectual property it creates.
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: Cambridge Consultants vs Very
| Capability | Cambridge Consultants | 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: Cambridge Consultants vs Very
| Framework / platform | Cambridge Consultants | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Embedded C | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | 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 | N/A |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Cambridge Consultants vs Very
| Criterion | Cambridge Consultants | 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: Cambridge Consultants vs Very
| Dimension | Cambridge Consultants | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Healthcare and medical devices, Telecoms, Consumer electronics | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics |
| Best use cases | A medtech firm needs a new sensing method developed for a diagnostic device., A telecoms company wants a custom radio designed. | 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 |
Cambridge Consultants vs Very: pros and cons
| Cambridge Consultants | |
|---|---|
| + | Can solve physics and RF problems that most IoT vendors would avoid |
| + | Long medical device record with quality systems to match |
| + | Capgemini's global network for scale-up after development |
| - | Owned by Capgemini since 2020 through the Altran deal |
| - | Premium pricing that rarely suits ordinary connected products |
| - | Less focus on long-term cloud operations |
| 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 Cambridge Consultants?
A typical fit: a medtech firm needs a new sensing method developed for a diagnostic device.
Scientists and engineers able to invent the technology a product needs, not just integrate existing modules. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Healthcare and medical devices, Telecoms, Consumer electronics, Industrial equipment, Agriculture.
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: Cambridge Consultants vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Cambridge Consultants |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Cambridge Consultants (Not published) vs Very ($250,000) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Cambridge Consultants |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Very |
| You need the circuit board designed as well as the firmware | Cambridge Consultants |
Use case fit: Cambridge Consultants vs Very
| Use case | Cambridge Consultants fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A medtech firm needs a new sensing method developed for a diagnostic device. | Strong | Limited | Cambridge Consultants |
| A telecoms company wants a custom radio designed. | Strong | Limited | Cambridge Consultants |
| 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 | Cambridge Consultants |
Verdict: Cambridge Consultants vs Very
Cambridge Consultants (4.4/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IoT Development projects. Scientists and engineers able to invent the technology a product needs, not just integrate existing modules.
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
Cambridge Consultants vs Very FAQ
Is Cambridge Consultants better than Very?
Cambridge Consultants (4.4/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Cambridge Consultants's strongest advantage: can solve physics and RF problems that most IoT vendors would avoid. Very's strongest advantage: US-based engineers and product managers.
How do Cambridge Consultants and Very differ in pricing?
Cambridge Consultants uses time and materials, fixed price for defined phases 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: Cambridge Consultants or Very?
Cambridge Consultants 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 Cambridge Consultants and Very?
Cambridge Consultants's primary differentiator is: scientists and engineers able to invent the technology a product needs, not just integrate existing modules. Very's primary differentiator is: US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. They also differ in team size (800–900 vs 150–250), minimum engagement (Not published vs $250,000), and primary industries served (Healthcare and medical devices, Telecoms vs Industrial equipment, Energy).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.