Very vs GlobalLogic: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Very (4.2/5) edges ahead of GlobalLogic (3.9/5) overall. Very is the better choice for funded US product teams, platform-heavy IoT. GlobalLogic is the stronger option for large industrial IoT programmes, Hitachi ecosystem. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Very vs GlobalLogic: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Very | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2011 | 2000 |
| HQ | Bozeman, Montana, United States (distributed) | San Jose, California, United States (Hitachi) |
| Team size | 150–250 | 30,000+ |
| Rating | 4.2 / 5 | 3.9 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering | Chip-to-cloud engineering backed by Hitachi's industrial portfolio |
| Pricing model | Time and materials | Time and materials, managed service |
| Min. engagement | $250,000 | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded C, Elixir, Nerves | Embedded C/C++, AUTOSAR, AWS IoT |
| Industries served | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture | Automotive, Industrial equipment, Healthcare, Telecoms |
Very vs GlobalLogic: 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.
GlobalLogic
GlobalLogic was founded in 2000 and became part of Hitachi in 2021, where it feeds the Lumada industrial IoT business. Revelio Labs estimated around 65,000 employees at the end of 2025, down 3.5% on the year. It describes its work as chip-to-cloud engineering, and its European centres specialise in embedded and automotive software. Its size suits large programmes far better than single-device projects.
Services and capabilities: Very vs GlobalLogic
| Capability | Very | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| 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 GlobalLogic
| Framework / platform | Very | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azure IoT | N/A | ✓ |
| FPGA | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Very vs GlobalLogic
| Criterion | Very | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | $250,000 | Not published |
| Engagement models | Time and materials, Team extension | Dedicated team, Managed service, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Very vs GlobalLogic
| Dimension | Very | GlobalLogic |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics | Automotive, Industrial equipment, Healthcare |
| 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. | An automaker needs hundreds of embedded engineers., A utility wants an industrial IoT platform. |
| Typical project type | Time and materials | Dedicated team |
Very vs GlobalLogic: 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 |
| GlobalLogic | |
|---|---|
| + | Huge capacity for large programmes |
| + | Embedded and automotive centres in Europe |
| + | Hitachi's industrial partners |
| - | Hitachi ownership since 2021 ties strategy to Lumada |
| - | Too heavy for most single-product projects |
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 GlobalLogic?
A typical fit: an automaker needs hundreds of embedded engineers.
Chip-to-cloud engineering backed by Hitachi's industrial portfolio. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Automotive, Industrial equipment, Healthcare, Telecoms.
Decision matrix: Very vs GlobalLogic
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Both offer fixed-price models |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | GlobalLogic |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Very ($250,000) vs GlobalLogic (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 GlobalLogic
| Use case | Very fit | GlobalLogic 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 |
| An automaker needs hundreds of embedded engineers. | Limited | Strong | GlobalLogic |
| A utility wants an industrial IoT platform. | Limited | Strong | GlobalLogic |
| You need custom electronics designed, not only firmware | Strong | Limited | Very |
| You want a fixed-price first phase before a longer engagement | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Very vs GlobalLogic
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.
GlobalLogic (3.9/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a utility wants an industrial IoT platform. If your situation matches that, GlobalLogic is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Very vs GlobalLogic FAQ
Is Very better than GlobalLogic?
Very (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Very's strongest advantage: US-based engineers and product managers. GlobalLogic's strongest advantage: huge capacity for large programmes.
How do Very and GlobalLogic differ in pricing?
Very uses time and materials pricing with a minimum engagement of $250,000. GlobalLogic uses time and materials, managed service pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Very or GlobalLogic?
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 Very and GlobalLogic?
Very's primary differentiator is: US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. GlobalLogic's primary differentiator is: chip-to-cloud engineering backed by Hitachi's industrial portfolio. They also differ in team size (150–250 vs 30,000+), minimum engagement ($250,000 vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial equipment, Energy vs Automotive, Industrial equipment).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.