Very vs N-iX: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Very (4.2/5) edges ahead of N-iX (4.1/5) overall. Very is the better choice for funded US product teams, platform-heavy IoT. N-iX is the stronger option for IoT platforms needing large data and cloud teams. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Very vs N-iX: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Very | N-iX |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2011 | 2002 |
| HQ | Bozeman, Montana, United States (distributed) | Lviv, Ukraine |
| Team size | 150–250 | 2,000–2,500 |
| Rating | 4.2 / 5 | 4.1 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering | Big cloud and data bench to put behind a device programme |
| Pricing model | Time and materials | Dedicated team, time and materials |
| Min. engagement | $250,000 | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded C, Elixir, Nerves | Embedded C/C++, AWS IoT, Azure IoT |
| Industries served | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics, Agriculture | Industrial equipment, Telecoms, Healthcare, Logistics |
Very vs N-iX: 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.
N-iX
N-iX started in Lviv in 2002 and reports more than 2,400 engineers across Europe, the Americas and Asia-Pacific. Its IoT practice sits alongside data, cloud and enterprise work, and covers embedded software, connectivity and cloud platforms. The scale helps when a connected-product programme needs many cloud and data engineers. Most delivery is from Ukraine and Poland.
Services and capabilities: Very vs N-iX
| Capability | Very | N-iX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 N-iX
| Framework / platform | Very | N-iX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 N-iX
| Criterion | Very | N-iX |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | $250,000 | Not published |
| Engagement models | Time and materials, Team extension | Dedicated team, Time and materials |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Very vs N-iX
| Dimension | Very | N-iX |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial equipment, Energy, Consumer electronics | Industrial equipment, Telecoms, 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. | A manufacturer needs a data platform for millions of sensor readings., A logistics firm wants a fleet tracking back end. |
| Typical project type | Time and materials | Dedicated team |
Very vs N-iX: 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 |
| N-iX | |
|---|---|
| + | Can scale cloud and data teams quickly |
| + | Good fit for platform-heavy IoT |
| + | Ukrainian and Polish rates |
| - | IoT is one practice among many, not the core business |
| - | No electronics design |
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 N-iX?
A typical fit: a manufacturer needs a data platform for millions of sensor readings.
Big cloud and data bench to put behind a device programme. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial equipment, Telecoms, Healthcare, Logistics.
Decision matrix: Very vs N-iX
| 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 | N-iX |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Very ($250,000) vs N-iX (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 N-iX
| Use case | Very fit | N-iX 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 needs a data platform for millions of sensor readings. | Limited | Strong | N-iX |
| A logistics firm wants a fleet tracking back end. | Limited | Strong | N-iX |
| 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 N-iX
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.
N-iX (4.1/5) is worth a look in a scenario like this: a logistics firm wants a fleet tracking back end. If your situation matches that, N-iX is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Very vs N-iX FAQ
Is Very better than N-iX?
Very (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Very's strongest advantage: US-based engineers and product managers. N-iX's strongest advantage: can scale cloud and data teams quickly.
How do Very and N-iX differ in pricing?
Very uses time and materials pricing with a minimum engagement of $250,000. N-iX uses dedicated team, time and materials pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Very or N-iX?
N-iX 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 N-iX?
Very's primary differentiator is: US-only distributed team with strong product management and platform engineering. N-iX's primary differentiator is: big cloud and data bench to put behind a device programme. They also differ in team size (150–250 vs 2,000–2,500), minimum engagement ($250,000 vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial equipment, Energy vs Industrial equipment, Telecoms).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.