Very vs Rigado: full comparison for 2026
Quick verdict
Rigado (4.3/5) edges ahead of Very (4.2/5) overall. Rigado is the better choice for commercial IoT deployments needing pre-certified BLE modules and firmware. Very is the stronger option for distributed-delivery IoT programs needing firmware plus data and ML. The right choice depends on your project size, budget, and required tech stack.
Very vs Rigado: head-to-head summary
| Criterion | Very | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2011 | 2010 |
| HQ | Bozeman, Montana, USA (fully distributed team) | Portland and Salem, Oregon, USA (also London, UK and Shenzhen, China) |
| Team size | 51–200 | 12–17 |
| Rating | 4.2 / 5 | 4.3 / 5 |
| Primary differentiator | Fully distributed IoT team combining firmware delivery with machine-learning-driven data solutions | Pre-certified low-power wireless modules paired with edge computing and firmware for large-scale commercial IoT rollouts |
| Pricing model | IoT product development engagements from concept through deployment | Product and firmware engagements, plus module and hardware sales |
| Min. engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Primary tech stack | Embedded C/C++, IoT connectivity stacks, Machine learning data pipelines | BLE, 802.15.4, Edge computing platforms |
| Industries served | Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Smart infrastructure | Retail IoT, Smart buildings, Asset tracking |
Very vs Rigado: overview
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.
Rigado
Rigado was founded in 2010 by Justin Rigling and Ben Corrado and is headquartered in Portland and Salem, Oregon, with additional offices in London and Shenzhen; employee counts are reported between roughly 12 and 17 people depending on the source. The firm provides pre-certified low-power wireless modules alongside gateways, firmware, and an edge computing platform for commercial and industrial IoT deployments such as asset tracking and smart buildings. Its small team size focused on Bluetooth Low Energy and edge connectivity makes it a narrower specialist than the larger, broader-scope firms on this list.
Services and capabilities: Very vs Rigado
| Capability | Very | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| 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: Very vs Rigado
| Framework / platform | Very | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | ✓ |
| 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: Very vs Rigado
| Criterion | Very | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum engagement | Not published | Not published |
| Engagement models | Fixed project, Dedicated team | Fixed project |
| Rate transparency | Not public | Not public |
| Price tier | Mid-market | Mid-market |
Target audience comparison: Very vs Rigado
| Dimension | Very | Rigado |
|---|---|---|
| Best company size | Startup to mid-market | Startup to mid-market |
| Best industries | Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT, Smart infrastructure | Retail IoT, Smart buildings, Asset tracking |
| Best use cases | IoT program needing firmware paired with machine-learning-driven data analysis, Smart infrastructure product requiring both device firmware and interface design | Large-scale commercial IoT deployment needing pre-certified BLE modules, Smart building or asset-tracking program requiring an edge computing platform alongside firmware |
| Typical project type | Fixed project | Fixed project |
Very vs Rigado: pros and cons
| 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 |
| Rigado | |
|---|---|
| + | Pre-certified BLE and low-power wireless modules can shorten time to certification for a new IoT product |
| + | Offices spanning Oregon, London, and Shenzhen give reach across major IoT manufacturing and deployment regions |
| + | Edge computing platform plus firmware and modules covers the full connectivity stack for large rollouts |
| - | Team size in the low teens limits capacity for large, multi-workstream programs |
| - | Narrow specialization in BLE and edge connectivity is a weaker fit for RTOS-heavy or bare-metal firmware projects outside that scope |
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.
Who should choose Rigado?
A typical fit: large-scale commercial IoT deployment needing pre-certified BLE modules.
Pre-certified low-power wireless modules paired with edge computing and firmware for large-scale commercial IoT rollouts. Minimum engagement is not publicly disclosed. Works best with clients in Retail IoT, Smart buildings, Asset tracking.
Decision matrix: Very vs Rigado
| Your situation | Recommended choice |
|---|---|
| You need full-ownership delivery on a defined project scope | Very |
| You need a large dedicated team for an ongoing programme | Very |
| Your budget is at the lower end | Compare: Very (Not published) vs Rigado (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: Very vs Rigado
| Use case | Very fit | Rigado fit | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Large-scale commercial IoT deployment needing pre-certified BLE modules | Limited | Strong | Rigado |
| Smart building or asset-tracking program requiring an edge computing platform alongside firmware | Strong | Strong | Both equally |
| Fixed-price build | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
| Staff augmentation | Limited | Limited | Both equally |
Verdict: Very vs Rigado
Rigado (4.3/5) is the stronger overall choice for most Firmware Development projects. Pre-certified low-power wireless modules paired with edge computing and firmware for large-scale commercial IoT rollouts.
Very (4.2/5) is worth a look if you need smart infrastructure product requiring both device firmware and interface design. If your situation matches that, Very is a competitive option.
Related comparisons
Very vs Rigado FAQ
Is Very better than Rigado?
Rigado (4.3/5) scores higher overall, but "better" depends on your use case. Very's strongest advantage: repeat appearances on the Inc. 5000 list provide a verifiable third-party growth signal. Rigado's strongest advantage: pre-certified BLE and low-power wireless modules can shorten time to certification for a new IoT product.
How do Very and Rigado differ in pricing?
Very uses iot product development engagements from concept through deployment pricing. Rigado uses product and firmware engagements, plus module and hardware sales pricing. Neither firm publishes a full rate card; a discovery call is required for project-specific quotes.
Which is better for enterprise: Very or Rigado?
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 Rigado?
Very's primary differentiator is: fully distributed IoT team combining firmware delivery with machine-learning-driven data solutions. Rigado's primary differentiator is: pre-certified low-power wireless modules paired with edge computing and firmware for large-scale commercial IoT rollouts. They also differ in team size (51–200 vs 12–17), minimum engagement (Not published vs Not published), and primary industries served (Industrial IoT, Consumer IoT vs Retail IoT, Smart buildings).
Verify all details directly with each company before making a decision.