Dojo Five vs ARi: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Dojo Five (4.5/5) edges ahead of ARi (4.0/5) overall. Dojo Five is the better choice for teams wanting automated firmware CI/CD instead of manual builds. ARi is the stronger option for large industrial programs needing firmware inside a broader engineering scope. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Dojo Five vs ARi: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Dojo Five | ARi |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2018 | 2006 |
| HQ | Saint Paul, Minnesota, USA | East Peoria, Illinois, USA |
| Team size | 26 | 1,100+ |
| Rating | 4.5 / 5 | 4.0 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams | Industrial engineering scale spanning mechanical design, manufacturing, and embedded firmware in one organization |
| Pricing model | Firmware engineering and DevOps-style tooling consulting | Integrated engineering and manufacturing services engagements |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | C, C++, On-premise and cloud CI/CD | Embedded C/C++, Industrial automation platforms, Manufacturing engineering tooling |
| Industries served | Industrial equipment, Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Industrial automation, Robotics, Manufacturing |
Dojo Five vs ARi: overview
Dojo Five
Dojo Five was founded in 2018 and is based in Saint Paul, Minnesota, with a team of roughly 26 people. Rather than positioning as a general embedded firm, the company markets itself specifically around modernizing the firmware development lifecycle: automated builds, hardware-in-the-loop testing, and monitoring pipelines that most older firmware vendors still handle manually. That focus means Dojo Five is a better fit for a team that already has a codebase and needs tooling and process discipline than for a from-scratch product build.
ARi
ARi traces its engineering roots to 2001 and began operating under the ARi brand in 2006, headquartered in East Peoria, Illinois, with seven additional locations across North America and Asia Pacific; the company reports more than 1,100 employees. Embedded software and firmware sit inside a much broader industrial engineering business that also covers mechanical product design, manufacturing engineering, industrial automation, and robotics, so ARi suits a client whose project spans hardware, firmware, and manufacturing rather than firmware in isolation. Its scale supports large industrial programs that a boutique firmware firm could not staff alone.
Services and capabilities: Dojo Five vs ARi
| Capability | Dojo Five | ARi |
|---|---|---|
| RTOS firmware development | ✓ | ✓ |
| Bare-metal & driver development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Secure boot / OTA firmware updates | ✗ | ✗ |
| MCU & platform migration | ✗ | ✗ |
| Connectivity & IoT protocols | ✗ | ✗ |
| Functional safety / MISRA compliance | ✓ | ✓ |
| Embedded AI / on-device inference | ✗ | ✗ |
| Firmware GUI development | ✗ | ✗ |
| Staff augmentation | ✗ | ✗ |
Tech stack comparison: Dojo Five vs ARi
| Framework / platform | Dojo Five | ARi |
|---|---|---|
| FreeRTOS | N/A | N/A |
| Zephyr | N/A | N/A |
| STM32 | N/A | N/A |
| ARM Cortex-M | N/A | N/A |
| BLE | N/A | N/A |
| Embedded Linux | N/A | N/A |
| Secure OTA | N/A | N/A |
| PCB | N/A | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | N/A |
| RISC-V | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Dojo Five vs ARi
| Criterion | Dojo Five | ARi |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Dojo Five vs ARi
| Dimension | Dojo Five | ARi |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial equipment, Medical devices, Consumer electronics | Industrial automation, Robotics, Manufacturing |
| Best use cases | Existing firmware codebase with no automated test coverage or CI pipeline, Medical device team needing automated regression testing ahead of a compliance audit | Industrial equipment program needing mechanical design, manufacturing, and firmware together, Robotics platform requiring embedded firmware integrated with automation hardware |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Dojo Five vs ARi: pros and cons
| Dojo Five | |
|---|---|
| + | Specific focus on firmware CI/CD and automated testing addresses a gap most other firms on this list treat as an afterthought |
| + | Team of 26 keeps every engagement senior-engineer-led rather than staffed with junior generalists |
| + | Modern tooling background reduces the manual regression-testing burden common at older firmware vendors |
| - | Team of 26 limits capacity for very large, multi-year programs |
| - | Founded in 2018, so its public track record is shorter than firms with decades of delivery history |
| ARi | |
|---|---|
| + | More than 1,100 employees and eight total locations support very large industrial programs |
| + | Embedded firmware sits alongside mechanical design and manufacturing engineering for hardware-heavy products |
| + | Long engineering history predating the current brand, formalized under the ARi name in 2006 |
| - | Firmware is a smaller specialty inside a much larger industrial automation and manufacturing business |
| - | Scale and process overhead can be more than a small firmware-only project actually needs |
Who should choose Dojo Five?
A typical fit: existing firmware codebase with no automated test coverage or CI pipeline.
Built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial equipment, Medical devices, Consumer electronics.
Who should choose ARi?
A typical fit: industrial equipment program needing mechanical design, manufacturing, and firmware together.
Industrial engineering scale spanning mechanical design, manufacturing, and embedded firmware in one organization. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial automation, Robotics, Manufacturing.
Decision matrix: Dojo Five vs ARi
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Dojo Five |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Dojo Five |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Dojo Five (Not published) vs ARi (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Dojo Five |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Dojo Five |
Use case fit: Dojo Five vs ARi
| Use case | Dojo Five fit | ARi fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Existing firmware codebase with no automated test coverage or CI pipeline | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Medical device team needing automated regression testing ahead of a compliance audit | Strong | Limited | Dojo Five |
| Industrial equipment program needing mechanical design, manufacturing, and firmware together | Limited | Strong | ARi |
| Robotics platform requiring embedded firmware integrated with automation hardware | Limited | Strong | ARi |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Dojo Five vs ARi
Dojo Five (4.5/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams.
ARi (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need robotics platform requiring embedded firmware integrated with automation hardware. If your situation matches that, ARi is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Dojo Five vs ARi FAQ
Is Dojo Five better than ARi?
Dojo Five (4.5/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Dojo Five's strongest advantage: specific focus on firmware CI/CD and automated testing addresses a gap most other firms on this list treat as an afterthought. ARi's strongest advantage: more than 1,100 employees and eight total locations support very large industrial programs.
How do Dojo Five and ARi differ in pricing?
Dojo Five uses firmware engineering and devops-style tooling consulting pricing. ARi uses integrated engineering and manufacturing services engagements pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Dojo Five or ARi?
ARi 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 Dojo Five and ARi?
Dojo Five's primary differentiator is: built specifically around bringing modern CI/CD, automated testing, and monitoring pipelines to embedded firmware teams. ARi's primary differentiator is: industrial engineering scale spanning mechanical design, manufacturing, and embedded firmware in one organization. They also differ in team size (26 vs 1,100+), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial equipment, Medical devices vs Industrial automation, Robotics).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.