Promwad vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Promwad (4.5/5) edges ahead of Very (4.2/5) overall. Promwad is the better choice for mass-produced electronics, Linux and FPGA designs. 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.
Promwad vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Promwad | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2004 | 2011 |
| HQ | Vilnius, Lithuania and Essen, Germany | Bozeman, Montana, United States (distributed) |
| Team size | 100–150 | 150–250 |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Two decades designing devices for volume production, with offices across five EU countries | US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering |
| Pricing model | Fixed price, time and materials | Time and materials |
| Min. engagement | Not published | $250,000 |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded Linux, Yocto, FPGA | Embedded C, Elixir, Nerves |
| Industries served | Telecoms, Automotive, Industrial equipment, Consumer electronics, Energy | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture |
Promwad vs Very: overview
Promwad
Roman Pakholkov started Promwad in Minsk in 2004 to design mass-produced electronics on systems-on-chip and Linux, and the company later moved its business into the EU. Its Vilnius office, opened in 2016, became a headquarters, and a German entity in Essen now serves the DACH region. Promwad reports 100+ engineers, 500+ projects, and more than 3 million devices produced by its clients. Telecoms, automotive and FPGA work are its strongest areas.
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: Promwad vs Very
| Capability | Promwad | 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: Promwad vs Very
| Framework / platform | Promwad | 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 | N/A |
| FPGA | ✓ | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Promwad vs Very
| Criterion | Promwad | 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: Promwad vs Very
| Dimension | Promwad | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Telecoms, Automotive, Industrial equipment | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics |
| Best use cases | A telecoms equipment maker needs a Linux-based gateway designed for volume production., An automotive supplier needs FPGA and camera-processing work. | 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 |
Promwad vs Very: pros and cons
| Promwad | |
|---|---|
| + | Designs with mass production in mind, including manufacturing support |
| + | Strong embedded Linux and FPGA skills for complex devices |
| + | EU entities in Lithuania and Germany simplify contracting for European buyers |
| - | Belarusian origins may need explaining to some procurement teams, though operations have moved to the EU |
| - | Cloud and app development are thinner than its hardware and firmware work |
| - | Small team limits parallel projects |
| 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 Promwad?
A typical fit: a telecoms equipment maker needs a Linux-based gateway designed for volume production.
Two decades designing devices for volume production, with offices across five EU countries. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Telecoms, Automotive, Industrial equipment, Consumer electronics, Energy.
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: Promwad vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Promwad |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Check each company's engagement model |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Promwad (Not published) vs Very ($250,000) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Promwad |
| You want engineers added to your own in-house team | Very |
| You need the circuit board designed as well as the firmware | Promwad |
Use case fit: Promwad vs Very
| Use case | Promwad fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| A telecoms equipment maker needs a Linux-based gateway designed for volume production. | Strong | Limited | Promwad |
| An automotive supplier needs FPGA and camera-processing work. | Strong | Limited | Promwad |
| 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 | Promwad |
Verdict: Promwad vs Very
Promwad (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most IoT Development projects. Two decades designing devices for volume production, with offices across five EU countries.
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
Promwad vs Very FAQ
Is Promwad better than Very?
Promwad (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Promwad's strongest advantage: designs with mass production in mind, including manufacturing support. Very's strongest advantage: US-based engineers and product managers.
How do Promwad and Very differ in pricing?
Promwad uses fixed price, time and materials 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: Promwad or Very?
Very 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 Promwad and Very?
Promwad's primary differentiator is: two decades designing devices for volume production, with offices across five EU countries. Very's primary differentiator is: US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. They also differ in team size (100–150 vs 150–250), minimum engagement (Not published vs $250,000), and primary industries served (Telecoms, Automotive vs Industrial equipment, Energy).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.