Electrobit Technology vs Very: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Very (4.2/5) edges ahead of Electrobit Technology (4.0/5) overall. Very is the better choice for distributed-delivery IoT programs needing firmware plus data and ML. Electrobit Technology is the stronger option for budget-conscious IoT hardware needing electronics plus firmware. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Electrobit Technology vs Very: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Electrobit Technology | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2016 | 2011 |
| HQ | Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India | Bozeman, Montana, USA (fully distributed team) |
| Team size | 11–50 | 51–200 |
| Rating | 4.0 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Electronics design and embedded firmware delivered together from a single India-based team | Fully distributed IoT team combining firmware delivery with machine-learning-driven data solutions |
| Pricing model | Turnkey embedded product design engagements | IoT product development engagements from concept through deployment |
| Min. engagement | Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable) | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded C/C++, PCB design, Embedded Linux | Embedded C/C++, IoT connectivity stacks, Machine learning data pipelines |
| Industries served | Consumer IoT, Industrial electronics | Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Smart infrastructure |
Electrobit Technology vs Very: overview
Electrobit Technology
Electrobit Technology was founded in 2016 and is based in Ahmedabad, India, with a team in the 11 to 50 employee range. The firm's services span hardware and PCB design, high-speed PCB layout, embedded firmware, device driver development, embedded Linux, and cloud/mobile integration for IoT products. As a smaller, India-based firm, it can offer accessible pricing relative to European or US-headquartered peers, though public independent case studies beyond the company's own materials are limited.
Very
Very, formerly known by a different name, was founded in 2011 and is headquartered in Bozeman, Montana, operating as a fully distributed team of 51 to 200 people working from numerous countries rather than from central offices. The firm builds connected ecosystems spanning IoT hardware, firmware, and software infrastructure, plus interface design and machine-learning-driven data solutions built on top of device data. Very has appeared on the Inc. 5000 list of fastest-growing private US companies multiple times, a verifiable third-party growth signal distinct from marketing claims.
Services and capabilities: Electrobit Technology vs Very
| Capability | Electrobit Technology | Very |
|---|---|---|
| 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: Electrobit Technology vs Very
| Framework / platform | Electrobit Technology | Very |
|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| Secure OTA | N/A | N/A |
| PCB | ✓ | N/A |
| AWS IoT | N/A | N/A |
| RISC-V | N/A | N/A |
Pricing comparison: Electrobit Technology vs Very
| Criterion | Electrobit Technology | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable) | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project | Fixed project, Dedicated team |
| Rate transparency | Minimum disclosed | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Electrobit Technology vs Very
| Dimension | Electrobit Technology | Very |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Consumer IoT, Industrial electronics | Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Smart infrastructure |
| Best use cases | Budget-constrained IoT hardware product needing PCB design plus firmware, Device driver development for a new sensor or peripheral integration | IoT program needing firmware paired with machine-learning-driven data analysis, Smart infrastructure product requiring both device firmware and interface design |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Electrobit Technology vs Very: pros and cons
| Electrobit Technology | |
|---|---|
| + | Turnkey coverage from PCB design through firmware and cloud integration in one team |
| + | India-based delivery typically offers more accessible pricing than European or US firms of similar scope |
| + | Device driver and embedded Linux depth beyond basic firmware scripting |
| - | Founded in 2016, a shorter operating history than most other firms on this list |
| - | Independent, third-party case studies beyond the company's own site are limited |
| Very | |
|---|---|
| + | Repeat appearances on the Inc. 5000 list provide a verifiable third-party growth signal |
| + | Fully distributed team structure can draw specialist talent regardless of location |
| + | Combines firmware delivery with data solutions and machine learning on top of device telemetry |
| - | Fully distributed structure means no central office for in-person collaboration during an engagement |
| - | Montana headquarters is a smaller regional base than most firms' US locations on this list |
Who should choose Electrobit Technology?
A typical fit: budget-constrained IoT hardware product needing PCB design plus firmware.
Electronics design and embedded firmware delivered together from a single India-based team. Minimum engagement starts at Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable). Works best with clients in Consumer IoT, Industrial electronics.
Who should choose Very?
A typical fit: IoT program needing firmware paired with machine-learning-driven data analysis.
Fully distributed IoT team combining firmware delivery with machine-learning-driven data solutions. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Smart infrastructure.
Decision matrix: Electrobit Technology vs Very
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Electrobit Technology |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Very |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Electrobit Technology (Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable)) vs Very (Not published) |
| You need specialist depth in a specific vertical | Very |
| You need staff augmentation or team extension | Neither; consider alternatives that offer staff aug |
| You need consulting before committing to a build | Both may offer discovery engagements |
Use case fit: Electrobit Technology vs Very
| Use case | Electrobit Technology fit | Very fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Budget-constrained IoT hardware product needing PCB design plus firmware | Strong | Limited | Electrobit Technology |
| Device driver development for a new sensor or peripheral integration | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| IoT program needing firmware paired with machine-learning-driven data analysis | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Smart infrastructure product requiring both device firmware and interface design | Limited | Strong | Very |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Electrobit Technology vs Very
Very (4.2/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Fully distributed IoT team combining firmware delivery with machine-learning-driven data solutions.
Electrobit Technology (4.0/5) is worth a look if you need device driver development for a new sensor or peripheral integration. If your situation matches that, Electrobit Technology is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Electrobit Technology vs Very FAQ
Is Electrobit Technology better than Very?
Very (4.2/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Electrobit Technology's strongest advantage: turnkey coverage from PCB design through firmware and cloud integration in one team. Very's strongest advantage: repeat appearances on the Inc. 5000 list provide a verifiable third-party growth signal.
How do Electrobit Technology and Very differ in pricing?
Electrobit Technology uses turnkey embedded product design engagements pricing with a minimum engagement of Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable). Very uses iot product development engagements from concept through deployment pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Electrobit Technology 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 Electrobit Technology and Very?
Electrobit Technology's primary differentiator is: electronics design and embedded firmware delivered together from a single India-based team. Very's primary differentiator is: fully distributed IoT team combining firmware delivery with machine-learning-driven data solutions. They also differ in team size (11–50 vs 51–200), minimum engagement (Not published (per company website; independently unverifiable) vs Not published), and primary industries served (Consumer IoT, Industrial electronics vs Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.